Defendant shall be punished by a fine of one million won.

If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

On July 6, 2013, the Defendant is a person driving a village bus. On the road in front of the D bus stops in Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si on July 18:12, 2013, when the Defendant demanded a apology from the Defendant on the ground that the victim E (the age of 39) was rapidly changing the bus in front of the bus immediately before the bus, the Defendant used an injury to the Defendant, such as a fluoral salt, which requires approximately two weeks of medical treatment, by moving the bus that was driven in the future to the victim and shocking the right side part of the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Witness E;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Application of the CCTV accident scene, diagnostic certificate, photo at the scene of the accident, and the Acts and subordinate statutes on video records of black stuffs;

1. Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts, the choice of punishment, and fines;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The judgment of the defendant and his defense counsel on the assertion of the defendant and the defense counsel under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order alleged that the victim intentionally fighted on the bus of the defendant, and therefore, the victim made a statement to the effect that the defendant has not caused the victim to face on the bus. Thus, the victim does not find any part which seems to lack specific, consistent, and objective rationality in the contents of the statement, and there is no part which appears to be very consistent and objective in the defendant's vehicle at the time of the defendant's vehicle, and in light of the fact that a black box box box, which was installed on the defendant's vehicle, was taken by dividing the defendant's talk with the victim, and the front bus was opened on the defendant's bus, and it is possible to fully recognize the facts of the judgment, so the defendant and his defense counsel's above assertion is not accepted.