When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

On January 3, 2015, the Defendant: (a) around 20:50, the Defendant: (b) 100,000 won out of the drinking value 124,000 won to the proprietor of the restaurant run the restaurant, and (c) 124,000 won, and (d) expressed that the victim E, an employee of the restaurant, would be able to ask for the remainder of the money; (b) expressed that the victim “Ne is leh, food and drink,” and expressed that “Neh is leh, food and drink,” and expressed that the Defendant would be able to use the quih with the eye from the eye care to the kh with the eye care.

Therefore, the victim suffered damage to the inner part of the 14 days of treatment for 14 days, such as the impairment of the inner part of the treatment day, gymnasium, etc.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the injury diagnosis certificate and the case-related photograph;

1. Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts, Article 257(1) of the choice of punishment, and the choice of fines (in the absence of recovery from damage to the victim even though the defendant was led to confession and reflect, and there are some circumstances to consider the details of the crime);

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. It is so decided as per Disposition for not less than Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act.