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

1. On July 19, 2013, at the entrance of the Kimhae-si B apartment on the 22:15th day of July 2013, 2013, the victim D (56 years of age) who drives the C cab on which the Defendant was on board, stated that “I have been on different occasions, and there has been 3,000 won in charge.” In addition, I am a time room for “Walkalk's change.”

Since then, the Defendant gave up receiving taxi charges and brought about five times the face of the victim by going back to the back seat of the taxi, and brought about the body and face of the victim several times, which require approximately 65 days of treatment to the victim of the vehicle.

2. The Defendant damaged the property by cutting off the aforementioned mobile phone from one cell phone in the market value of KRW 473,00, which is the victim’s possession in order to make a report after having been assaulted, at the same time and place as that of paragraph (1).

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. A written diagnosis of injury;

1. Written estimate of damage;

1. Investigation report- the application of Acts and subordinate statutes, such as investigation of the injured party's standing level;

1. Relevant Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of injury), Article 366 of the Criminal Act (the point of causing damage to property), and the choice of fines for the crime;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order is that the defendant, without any reason, inflicts an injury on the victim who is a taxi engineer and damages the property and the nature of the crime is not good, and the degree of injury on the victim is not minor, etc., which are disadvantageous to the defendant, or that the defendant is in profoundly against the defendant while committing the crime, and that the accompanying company goes home only at the last round of the workplace pay and the accompanying company appears to have reached an contingent crime, and that the defendant has no same criminal power.