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

At around 05:20 on December 25, 2015, the Defendant received a claim from the victim E of his profescing sexual intercourse with D on the front side of the “C convenience store” located in Sinpo City B, which led to the Defendant’s fescing sexual intercourse with D, and the Defendant fescing the instant E’s left face by drinking fescing it, and fescing it over once by drinking the part of the victim F’s face that fescing it.

이로써 피고인은 피해자 E에게 왼쪽 얼굴 부위가 빨갛게 부어오르게 하는 치료 일수를 알 수 없는 안면부 타박상을, 피해자 F에게는 약 3 주간의 치료를 요하는 비골의 골절상을 각각 가하였다.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the interrogation of suspect of the police of the F;

1. Statement made by each police officer in E and D;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the upper part of the F, the photo of the upper part of the F, the photo of E, and the medical certificate of injury;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning facts constituting an offense;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The part dismissing a public prosecution under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act against the order of provisional payment

1. On December 25, 2015, the Defendant was aware of the victim D’s left face on the front side of the “C convenience store” located in Sinpo City B around 05:20 on December 25, 2015, and was aware of the victim D, and assaulted on one hand the victim’s left face.

2. The crime described in this part of the facts charged is a crime falling under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act and cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under Article 260(3) of the Criminal Act. According to the written agreement bound in the records of the public trial, the victim can be acknowledged the fact that he/she has withdrawn his/her wish to punish the defendant around February 5, 2016, which is after the prosecution of the case. Thus, this part of the indictment is dismissed in accordance with Article 327(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.