Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

The Defendant is a person who serves as the head of a restaurant “C” located in Si interest-si.

On June 28, 2016, around 12:30 on June 28, 2016, the Defendant issued a fake to the victim E, a straw in which there are five to six staff members of a restaurant, such as D, within the kitchen of the above “C” restaurant.

No. 305,00

The victim was insulting by openly brupting the brush, “Before the brush,” and insulting the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation ( telephone investigation) and a report on investigation (C business owners and employees telephone investigation);

1. Relevant Article 311 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

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

1. Determination of the Defendant’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Provisional Payment Order (hereinafter “Aggravated Punishment”), the Defendant may take a bath when he is in a social life, and may take a bath. If a person takes a bath at the workplace is punished as a crime of insult, he/she is a society without the foregoing, and thus, he/she makes a statement that he

It is true that there is a legislative criticism that the offense of insult requires non-criminalization. However, it is not justifiable that such an offense should be resolved privately by private citizens.

As long as there is a crime of insult in criminal law, punishment of the defendant cannot be deemed to be unfair.

The defendant, after escape from North Korea in around 2002, was sentenced to a fine due to drinking traffic accidents in 2003 and was sentenced to a fine due to a crime of violence and a crime of interference with the execution of official duties.

Even after that, the criminal defendant has been continuously punished by imprisonment with prison labor, suspension of the execution of one imprisonment with prison labor and six fines.

Even in 2014 and 2015, the defendant has a history of being sentenced to suspension of indictment on two occasions or two occasions as a violent crime and a violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act.

The defendant seems to have any intention to comply with the laws of the Republic of Korea.