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

On September 7, 2013, at around 07:15, the Defendant’s body fighting with the victim E (the 51-year old age), who is working partner in the D plant located in Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, was neglected to perform his/her duties, and caused the victim’s bodily fighting, such as booming, booming and pushing down the victim’s breath, and booming the victim’s breath, and damaged the victim’s booming of two weeks of medical treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a criminal report;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of penalties;

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

1. The defendant's assertion of the provisional payment order under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is based on the fact that the defendant was close with the victim as a trial expense, and there is no fact that he unilaterally inflicted bodily injury on the victim. Thus, the facts charged cannot be acknowledged. However, since the defendant and the victim suffered bodily injury in the course of fighting with each other, the defendant cannot be exempted from the liability for the crime of bodily injury. Thus, the above argument by the defendant is without merit.

양형이유 다만, 이 사건 경위에 대하여 살펴 보건대, 피고인은 수사기관에서부터 이 법정에 이르기까지 피해자와 말다툼을 하다가 서로 밀고 당기고 하였다고 진술하고 있고, 목격자 F도 피고인과 피해자가 서로 멱살을 잡은 채 흔들며 싸우고 있어 자신이 말린 사실은 있으나 피고인이 피해자를 일방적으로 폭행하는 것은 보지 못하였다고 진술하고 있는데 반하여, 피해자는 수사기관 및 이 법정에서 서로 멱살을 잡고 밀고 당기고 한 것은 없고 피고인이 일방적으로 자신을 주먹으로 때리고 발로 찼다고 진술하고 있어 위와 같은 피해자의 진술은 목격자의 진술과도 배치되는 점, 피고인이 비록 피해자의 직장 상사인 관계에...