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

On April 24, 2014, the Defendant committed assault, such as flabing febbbling and taking a bath for the representative victim F, who found the Defendant on the ground of the payment of personnel expenses at the construction site of “D” located in Ma, as a matter of payment of personnel expenses.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness F and G;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of suspect with respect to F (two times, replacement);

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officer in G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (the president of the construction site)

1. Relevant Article 260 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act selection of punishment, and selection of fines;

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

1. Determination on the assertion by the Defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The summary of the argument, the defendant and his defense counsel did not use the force of the defendant at the time, such as bather fat, etc., and even if not, this does not constitute a legitimate defense and does not constitute a crime.

The argument is asserted.

2. The judgment of the court, the victim F, from the police to the court, that the defendant was able to blick the part of the defendant's breath, and the victim F, from the police to the court.

As consistently stated, it is not possible to find out the reason why the content of the statement is especially reasonable or not consistent with the rule, and the credibility of the statement is recognized in light of the attitude of the statement in this court.

In addition, the statement corresponding to the witness G [in particular, G explains the situation at the time of the interrogation of the police conducted by the injured person prior to the prosecution of the defendant, “The President of the Franchise, while dialogueing with each other, has been deemed to have been satisd by the male, and the male himself/herself has satisd by satisd of the Franchis of the president.”

In full view of the investigation reports, etc. on H at the construction site to the effect that “the Defendant and the victim have a scarcity and a little vagabonds,” which is naturally written (in the face of 25 pages) and “the Defendant and the victim have a scarcity.”