If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Defendant,

1. On April 28, 2014, at the Diplomatic Education Office of the Diplomatic Association located in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul, Seoul on April 28, 2014, assaulting the victim E (the age of 63) and the victim E during the dispute between the Defendant, who was the assistant pastor of the said church, on the ground that he did not go to the said office even after his term of office was terminated, on the ground that he did not go to the said office;

2. The Defendant and E, at the time, at the time, at the place, as described in paragraph (1) of this Article, shall inflict injury on the victim by pushing in excess of the victim F (e.g., 59 years of age) who was crypted by trial costs as described in paragraph (1) for about two weeks, on the right side, such as hand hand hand, etc., which requires treatment for about two weeks;

3. Around 07:50 on May 4, 2014, at the Diplomatic Office located in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, the victim E expressed the Defendant’s desire to read “the victim E promptly, fright, governance water, drinking water, and egress,” and assaulted the victim’s flaps, on the ground that the victim E expressed “the victim’s flab and flab.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of witness E and F;

1. Investigation Report (F's diagnosis report) - including an injury diagnosis report attached thereto;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted as to each video CD as a result of the reproduction and viewing of each video CD. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that they did not have committed any assault as indicated by the defendant.

However, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this Court, the following circumstances are recognized:

① The victim E stated from the investigative agency to this court that the Defendant was engaged in father, as stated in its reasoning, and the victim F also stated from the investigative agency to this court that the Defendant was pushed his chest as stated in the consistent judgment. The victim’s statement shows a somewhat different difference between the investigative agency and the court’s statement on the detailed parts, such as the time when the Defendant was taken into a cell phone, the time when the Defendant was taken into a cell phone, the time when the body fighting between the Defendant and the Defendant was taken, and the degree of damage.