When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

The Defendant is the head of the “C security guards” security guards and the victim D(30).

피고인은 2016. 10. 5. 06:45 경 대구 동구 E에 있는 ‘C’ 경비 실 안에서 전날 23:00 경 경비실 정수기 물통과 연구원 물통을 바꾸라는 말을 피해자에게 하자 이 사실을 센터 장 등에게 이야기 하여 기분이 나쁘다는 이유로, “ 니 보니 참 우습다” 고 하며 손바닥으로 피해자의 어깨 부위를 3번 툭 쳐서 폭행하였다.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of the witness D;

1. Application of statutes governing CDs for field recording;

1. Relevant Article 260 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting a crime and Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel's assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act asserted that since the defendant committed the crime of this case in the course of giving a warning of the victim's working attitude, it does not constitute a crime by excluding illegality as a legitimate act.

The term "act that does not violate the social norms" under Article 20 of the Criminal Act refers to an act that is acceptable in light of the overall spirit of legal order or social ethics or social norms surrounding it. Thus, in order for a certain act to constitute a justifiable act, requirements such as legitimacy of the motive or purpose of the act, reasonableness of the means or method of the act, balance between the legal interests and the interests of the law and the interests of the law, urgency, and supplementary nature that there is no other means or method than the act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Do8530, Feb. 25, 2005). According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court, the defendant was not good before the crime in this case was committed, and the defendant means that "the victim goes late to work at around 06:45, Oct. 5, 2016" means "the victim is good."