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

On May 22, 2017, the Defendant: (a) expressed that the victim D (the age of 80) was trying to get a confluence of the victim in front of the wife population B apartment C Dong, Young-si on May 22, 2017; and (b) expressed that the victim D (the age of 80) was trying to get a confluence of the victim, and assaulted the victim's bridge that goes beyond the victim's license once by breaking up the victim's tight and going beyond the

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Partial statement of witness D;

1. The recording of statements by witnesses E in the third protocol of trial;

1. Of the fifth trial records, the statement recording by the witness F [the defendant and his defense counsel may be denied that there is no consent by the defendant to walk the victim's bridge in excess of his appearance, but according to the evidence in the holding, the defendant's assertion against the defendant and his defense counsel shall not be accepted.] of the fifth trial records. However, according to each of the evidence in the holding, the defendant's assertion against this can be sufficiently recognized, since he can walk the victim's bridge.

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

1. At around 08:00 on May 22, 2017, the Defendant: (a) expressed that the victim D (the victim D (the age of 80) was selected from the victim’s scam in front of the wife population B apartment Cdong, and (b) expressed his desire to do so to the Defendant; (c) thereby, the Defendant inflicted an injury on the victim, such as the mouth scamb above the upper half of the runway, which requires approximately 12 weeks of medical treatment.

2. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged in light of the records, the evidence presented by the prosecutor alone, which led to the Defendant’s intentional injury.

It is not sufficient to recognize that there is a causal relationship between the result of violence and injury, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

(1) The victim who was the first witness shall be referred to in the nearest of the victim.