In such cases, the defendant neglected his/her duty of care to not contact the victim's face, thereby making the defendant saw the victim's saws of care.

Although the defendant has a duty of care to keep the dog in mind so that it does not harm or injure others, or to wear the protective gear such as the dog, he neglected it, so that the dog is not taken properly, and the dog is able to wear the body in the course of the process, and the dog is qui to the left side of the victim, and the dog goes beyond the victim in the process.

As a result, the defendant suffered by negligence the whole parts of the part in need of treatment for about 2 weeks from the victim.

2. Determination

A. Determination 1 on the part that the Defendant caused the victim to undergo a fluence by negligence while threateninging the victim to the victim) The victim’s partial statements in this court and statements in investigative agencies, consistent with this part of the facts charged, are difficult to believe in light of the following circumstances.

(1) The statements made by a victim are not consistent.

The police and prosecutor's office stated that the defendant unilaterally extending out of the victim's hands, and that the defendant faced the victim's face with fingers while living together with the victim, but this court examines the victim's face, and that the victim is flicking the victim in this court, and the victim's face is flicking the victim, and the victim's face is flicking into the victim'

was stated.

② Former site in this case

E/F’s statements are also inconsistent with those of E/F.

E is selling in order to avoid the defect that a person under this law desires to see and fit to the defendant while harming the victim.