If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

On December 2, 2011, at around 20:0, the Defendant assaulted the victim by sprinking the victim’s bat around the D restaurant located in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, on the ground that the victim E recklessly emblings himself/herself.

Summary of Evidence

1. Protocol of examination of witness to E of this court;

1. Application of each police interrogation protocol to the defendant

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 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The portion not guilty under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;

1. The Defendant, at the time and place indicated in the facts charged as indicated in the facts charged, carried the victim’s bage spons and sponsed the victim beyond the road floor, thereby causing the victim to suffer approximately 7 and 8 times to the right fages that need to be treated for about 6 weeks.

2. The burden of proof for the criminal facts prosecuted in a criminal trial for judgment is to be borne by a public prosecutor, and the conviction is to be based on evidence with probative value that makes a judge feel true beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, if there is no such evidence, the suspicion of guilt is between the defendant, even if there is no such evidence.

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

(See Supreme Court Decision 2002Do6110 Decided February 11, 2003, etc.). The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by this Court, namely, the Defendant consistently stated, from the police to the present court, that “the victim took a bath to the Defendant in the D cafeteria at the time of the instant case, and the surrounding club fees were only the fact that the victim got out of the floor in the process,” and the victim stated consistently from the police to the present court that “the victim took a bath to the Defendant, and there was only the fact that the victim got out of the floor at the time of the instant case.”