(b) Violence;

2.b.B. B (Woman, Women, 1982) and Company Board

3.B. Sick (1984 students, women) and part-time lecturers;

4.(b)Woman (Woman, Women, 1956) and other employees.

Attorney Kang Jin-cil, Park Jae-gu (Apon for Defendant Byung)

Attorney Yang Jin-soo (the national election for the purpose of the defendant)

Defendant B and 100,000 won per day shall be converted into one day if each of the above fines has not been paid.

Defendant shall be confined in a workhouse for a period of time.

In order to order the provisional payment of an amount equivalent to the above fine.

Defendant Byung is innocent.

The summary of this decision shall be published.

“2015 Highest 24

C was in operation while getting on the top of the vehicle operated by the husband A, and the defendant Eul was in operation with the mother's father, the mother's father, the son B, and the knife. The defendant Gap was in operation with the vehicle. The defendant Gap was in contact with the defendant Eul and the knife B after the occurrence of the case.

However, within the 4-distance distance of OOOO in the previous Jeju city, Defendant B, who was driven by Defendant B and the vehicle driven by Defendant A, became a trial cost due to the dangerous driving, and Defendant B, who was under the death of the said vehicle, was fluencing and did not stop, and Defendant B, who continued to drive A’s vehicle while driving the vehicle, continued to put B a pair of desire and put B up a car while holding a free window for the driver’s seat while driving it, and eventually stopped on the site of this case.

1. The defendant Eul's assault;

At around 19:30 on September 17, 2014, the Defendant: (a) stopped the Defendant’s vehicle after a vehicle of A, which was parked with a mast color signal at the same time, and left the vehicle after leaving the vehicle after the vehicle of A, which was parked with a masting signal at the same time; and (b) brought the vehicle into the front of A, and (c) brought the vehicle into dispute with A, while complying with the said vehicle.

At this time, the defendant's mother-friendly Manman B, who was the mother of the defendant at the next time, and the victim, who was the denial of the moving pictures with the mobile phone, was aware that the victim, who was the denial of the moving pictures, was the mother of the Do and the son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son

2. Defendant A’s injury

피고인은 제1항의 일시, 장소에서 , 피고인의 처인 B의 다급한 도움 요청 전화를 받 고 현장에 도착하였는데, 피해자 A가 나이가 어림에도 불구하고 어머니뻘인 자신의 장 모와 처, 처제에게 욕설하는 것을 보자 화가 나, 주먹으로 피해자의 얼굴을 여러 차례 때렸다.

As a result, the Defendant inflicted injury on the victim, such as cutting down or closing of a stoke, which requires approximately 28 days of treatment.

“2015 Highest 910

1. Defendant’s definition assault

At around 19:40 on September 17, 2014, the Defendant, who was on the roads near Dental, and on the rocketing car driven by the Defendant’s her father, was able to get on the road near Dental, and during the course of operating on the rocketing car driven by the Defendant’s her father, the Defendant was able to cause a contact accident with the SM car driven by the victim Byung, who is the other side of the victim sick.

The Defendant reported that the victim was exposed to his cellular phone while getting off his car, and assaulted the victim by making his hand his hand at one time, taking the victim’s head debt, etc.

Summary of Evidence

Omission

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Defendant A: Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act

Defendant B, Court Decision : Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Detention in a workhouse (the defendant, the court) : Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act;

1. Order to make provisional payment (the defendant, the court): Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act;

Part of innocence (each assault of the defendant Byung)

Summary of Facts charged

Defendant C used the date and time set forth in Paragraph (1) of the Criminal facts 2015-Ma24, at the place of the crime described in the holding, Defendant C used the victim B to take the head debt of Defendant C by her hand, her hand her hand, and used the Defendant’s her hand against Defendant B by her hand (including the Amendments to Bill of Indictment as of June 1, 2015), and (2) used the date and time set forth in Paragraph (1) of the Criminal facts stated in the holding, the date and time set forth in Paragraph (1) of the 2015-MaMa910, as of June 1, 2015, and the victim committed an assault from the victim’s her son at the same time and at the same place, and assaulted the victim by taking the victim’s justice her hand once.

Judgment

In full view of the witness Byung's legal statement, A's police statement, and evidence No. 1 (Scambox file, cell phone video file, cell phone video file) submitted by the defense counsel of the defendant Byung, the following facts may be determined:

① The vehicle driven by A while making a left-hand turn in the front of the vehicle driven by B, and the vehicle driven by A was made clear of the date of the traffic accident, and the vehicle of B was made clear of the A's driving seat window which was temporarily stopped after driving a vehicle of A, and the horse fighting began with the vehicle of A who was temporarily stopped.

② To avoid fighting, A took part of a fighting, and B took part of the vehicle and demanded a stop by opening a window by taking advantage of a fighting boat, etc. A, and the Defendant Byung, who was on the top of the vehicle operation of A, started to take a cell phone image.

③ At the location of the instant assault, A stops with the body of the vehicle, and B demanded A to take a bath in front of the vehicle driven by A, and Defendant C, a pipe of B’s test, told A to “the immediate person to the police station”.

④ While there was an overwork dispute between A and B in front of the vehicle, the Defendant C reported to the police station, and then the Defendant C reported to the police station, saying, “A was satisfying so as to have reported to the police.” Defendant C taken these processes by Handphone image from the chief of the vehicle steering group, but the Defendant C left the Defendant C’s handphone with the window with a high-satisfying door in the front door. However, the Defendant C left the Handphone and the head debt.

⑤ Upon receiving the phone from “A”, the Defendant C went through the war with “A,” and the Defendant C got her body while she called “Isia. followed (No. 1, No. 08, No. 19:42:10)” and “Isia, Isia, Isia, Isia, Isia, Isia, Isia, and Isia,” and her body fights “Isia, Isia, Isia, Isia, Isia, Isia, amsia, and amsia, Isia, and amsia, Isia, etc.).”

(B) As to this part, Defendant C was able to take a Handphone image with Defendant C’s scam and continued to take a Handphone, Defendant C was scambling with Defendant C’s hand by scam and scambling the Handphones in order to prevent the scamscams, and Defendant C scamed with scams on the floor of his hand, and scamed with B’s scam, and Defendant C scam scamd with Defendant C’s scam and scam, and Defendant C scamd with Defendant C’s scam in response thereto, and Defendant C scamed with scams.

6) In the process that Defendant C reported the appearance of assaulting Defendant C to E, B, and removed his fingers and descendants to this end, the Defendant assaulted A’s face face two times by drinking and drinking depending on A.

7) A, with A’s aid, was taken back again, while A was in motion in front of his/her motor vehicle boom box for the remaining evidence, and A, with A’s face added to 3-4 times depending on Party A and drinking, was taken into black booms (such as 10, 11. As a result, A suffered from an injury, such as the cutting of a bridge, closure, etc., which requires four weeks’ treatment).

8. The situation showed the fighting of the examinee at the same time, and the situation showed the appearance of the fighting, and the degree of additional assault of Eul and Gap.

(9) The termination of fighting with the arrival of the police (19:56:10).

According to the above facts, it is believed that the Defendant Byung taken the body of the fighting site, such as making the Defendant Byung go through A by using the Handphone image was a measure for the remaining devices as evidence of the other party's behavior acting within the scope of the barophone. Since the Defendant Byung's act of photographing the Defendant Byung was determined and there was no right or reason to force the Defendant Byung's act of taking the body, thereby damaging the Handphone and breaking the head and neck, the act of assaulting the Defendant Byung's hand by putting the Defendant Byung's hand, and assaulting the head and the knife, the act of assaulting the Defendant Byung's body constitutes an unfair infringement against the other person's life and body.

E. As to the fact that Defendant C committed an act of assaulting b/B (hereinafter referred to as “patch, etc.”) against the aforementioned act of assault by Defendant C, the respective statements of Jung, B/B (hereinafter referred to as “patch, etc.”) seem consistent with the aforementioned facts and the situation of occurrence of the case, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it differently.

In light of the fact that Defendant C wishes to report to B, etc., Defendant C wishes to do so from the beginning without thought that Defendant C was assaulted by B, Defendant C was assaulted by B, etc. immediately after Defendant C’s discharge (this evidence No. 1 file, No. 08, No. 19:42:10) and Non-Party B appeared in B’s vehicle, and her head was her head at one time and her own witness, etc. However, Defendant C was able to reverse Defendant C’s her face in light of the fact that C’s her head was her head at one time, and that C’s face was her head at one time, etc. (see evidence No. 2-2, No. 4 of Defendant C’s defense counsel) and that C’s face was her head at one time, and Defendant C’s her head was her head at one time, and Defendant C’s her head at one time before her statement was her own evidence (see evidence No. 8).

Even if Defendant C committed such an act of assault as above, it is recognized that there is considerable reason for Defendant C’s aforementioned act of assault to defend against Defendant C’s conduct of infringement. As such, Defendant C’s above act of assault does not constitute a crime under Article 21(1) of the Criminal Act by either having no intention of assault or undermining self-defense.

Therefore, in accordance with the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, the defendant Byung is acquitted and the summary of this decision is publicly announced in accordance with Article 58 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Reasons for sentencing (within the scope of recommended sentencing guidelines)

○ The instant case is a case in which a retaliation was committed by taking advantage of the other driver’s loss who is often likely to occur in his daily life, such as taking the other driver’s loss without taking the driver’s loss, and taking the bath following it, and further expanding

A is true that A has failed to drive safely, but it is not a threat that A has partially driven, but it is also a tangible damage or result, such as injury, etc., on the side of A's driving room, and A has driven as if A escaped in order to avoid fighting with Defendant B.

Nevertheless, the defendant B did not attend, and even after the end, the defendant B demanded the apology with the desire to stop the front of the A's vehicle and take the bath.

Defendant A, who was in contact with Party B and arrived at the site, did not know of the conditions before and after arrival, was only 4 monarched by assaulting the inside body of Party A on the sole ground that Party A’s age is less and disregarded his own horses, and thereby harming Party A’s bones.

Defendant 1 assaulted Defendant 1, 2, 2, 3, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 1, 5, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1,

Defendant B, Party A, and Party B’s act of retaliation are against the general public’s common sense, and in particular, Defendant A and Party C’s act of assaulting Party A, who is a driver of the other party, should be punished strictly as an unlawful act that is not justified for any reason. Defendant A’s act of assaulting Party A, despite being an Taekwondo instructor in the middle school, was not set up against Party A’s act of assaulting Party B. Defendant A’s act of assaulting Party A’s coke in the middle school. Defendant A’s act of assaulting Party A’s body and her head was put up on the face and her head was removed, and Defendant C’s act of assaulting Party A and C took into account the following factors: (a) Defendant A and C’s act of assaulting Party A’s parents in the vehicle, and (b) Defendant C and C’s family members were punished by a fine, taking into account the following factors: (c) Defendant A and C’s wife’s act of assaulting Party A and C’s wife.

○ Defendant A

General Injury Area: April to 1 year and six months;

Preferential Conditions: Deposit with A (C. 3.5 million won on July 17, 2015)

Unfavorable circumstances: Number of criminal records of the same kind (the actual punishment, the fine);

○ Defendant B, Defendant 3

February 10, the basic area of general assault

A favorable normal condition: Deposit of Byung (1.5 million won on July 17, 2015), each initial crime