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

On October 30, 2012, at around 18:25, the Defendant: (a) was driving an Ortob in front of the front door of the Nam-gu Incheon apartment apartment site B, and the Defendant: (b) was able to damage the unexpected property by removing a hear, which was worn out by the EcarF tour bus owned by the victim D, for the reason that the EcarF tour bus operated by C was able to turn to the left and obstructed the course by making the left-hand turn to the left; and (c) by cutting down the front part of the front part of the driver’s seat of the given tourist bus one time, the Defendant

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Application of written estimates or photographs of damaged vehicles;

1. Article 36 of the Criminal Act and Article 366 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime, the choice of fines;

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

1. The dismissal part of the prosecution under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. On October 30, 2012, the Defendant: (a) around 18:25 on October 30, 2012, the summary of the facts charged was assaulted by the victim at one time on the part of the passenger, on the ground that the Eccar tour bus owned by D Co., Ltd. (the age of 35) operated by the victim C (the age of 35) was left left to the left and obstructed the course of the Eccar tour bus, which was operated by the victim C (the age of 35).

2. We examine the judgment. This part of the facts charged is a crime falling under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act that cannot be prosecuted against the victim's explicit intent under Article 260(3) of the Criminal Act. Article 232(3) and (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that the victim cannot reverse his/her previous wish to punish and express his/her previous wish to punish him/her. According to the second police statement against the victim C, according to the victim's second police statement, the victim C may clearly express his/her intention not to punish him/her on December 5, 2012, which is prior to the prosecution of this case. Thus, the victim C is punished by the defendant.