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

On August 26, 2015, around 03:55, the Defendant used the victim's face in front of D in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Seoul, due to parking problems, and the victim E (50 years of age) was exposed to the defendant's face due to drinking, against the victim's face, and assaulted the victim with the victim's body.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol concerning the interrogation of suspects of E;

1. Application of CD video-related Acts and subordinate statutes

1. Relevant Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

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

1. The Defendant and his defense counsel on the assertion of the Defendant and the defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act asserts that the Defendant’s act constitutes a self-defense or a justifiable act, since the Defendant’s act was an act for the purpose of defending an unjust attack against himself/herself. In a case where it is reasonable to deem that the perpetrator’s act was committed first with the intent of attack, rather than with the intent of defending the victim’s unjust attack, and became an attack, the harmful act is an act of attack at the same time as an act of attack, and thus, it cannot be deemed as a self-defense or excessive

(2) According to the reasoning of the lower court’s judgment, the Defendant’s crime is at the same time a defense against an attack by the victim, and at the same time an attack by the victim. Therefore, the Defendant’s act cannot be deemed as a self-defense or a legitimate act with a reasonable ground, which is an act to protect the present infringement of the legal interests of himself/herself or others, and thus, constitutes a self-defense or a legitimate act.

The above argument is without merit.