On August 14, 2015, around 15:10, the Defendant stated in the written indictment that “security personnel” was included in the written indictment of the store manager, which had 2 punishment equivalent to 316,000 won in the market price owned by the victim D, which was managed by the victim D in Seo-gu Daejeon, as of August 14, 2015, because according to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the occupation of the victim G appears to be “sales manager,” and thus, correction is made.

While escaping from the victim G(28 years of age), it was put to the Isanbu in Seo-gu Daejeon and the bus stops in front of the Isanbu in Seo-gu, Daejeon.

For the purpose of evading arrest, the Defendant threatened the victim G with “Chos Ba...............” The Defendant, by hand, assaulted the victim G by overshing the shoulder of the victim G, continuing to flee, and putting them back again.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness G;

1. Application of the police seizure protocol (No. 1 of the evidence list) Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Articles 335 and 333 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes;

2. Determination on the assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel as to the grounds for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (the following grounds for sentencing)

1. The gist of the assertion: (a) the Defendant fleded after theft of two punishments, but did not assault or threaten the Victim G; and (b) even if the Defendant assaulted or threatened the Victim G, it does not constitute assault or intimidation to the extent of suppressing the resistance of the Victim G; and thus, it cannot be deemed as assault or intimidation demanding the Defendant’s act in the crime of robbery.

Therefore, the defendant is not charged with robbery.

2. Determination

B. First, the argument.