Around 00:30 on November 11, 2014, the Defendant committed an assault, such as breaking up and breaking the victim’s head debt in front of the Han Bank, which is located near the above main point, on the ground that the victim C (at least 29 years of age) who had been a customer in the above main point was able to file a lawsuit and went out of the main place without paying the drinking value, thereby causing the victim to commit an assault, such as breaking up and breaking up the victim’s head debt and breaking up the trees, etc., which requires approximately two weeks of treatment.

2. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion is that the Defendant and his defense counsel met the Victim with the F’s head debt f and the F’s head debt f and the Defendant met the F’s head debt f and did not assault the Victim as shown in the facts charged.

3. The burden of proving the facts charged in a criminal trial for judgment is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction is to be based on evidence of probative value, which makes a judge not having reasonable doubt as to whether the facts charged are true. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, the doubt of guilt against the defendant is between the suspect and the suspect.

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Do9633 Decided November 11, 2010, etc.)