Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

At around 23:40 on August 11, 2014, the Defendant, on the ground that the victim E (55 years of age) did not pay the drinking value on the road located in Seongbuk-gu, Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-gu, Seoul, for the reason that the victim E (5 years of age) did not commit a conflict with the victim. On the other hand, the Defendant assaulted the victim by going beyond the victim by walking the table table in front of the victim and destroying the ebbbb in both hands, and intending to ebbling the ebbb.

Summary of Evidence

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on witness F and G’s respective statutory statements;

1. Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes;

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

1. As to the defense counsel’s assertion of provisional payment order under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the defense counsel asserts that the defendant’s act constitutes legitimate self-defense or legitimate act, since the defendant did not commit an assault by cutting over the ebbbat.

In light of the above evidence, the defendant's act constitutes an active attack against E, and it is difficult to view the defendant's act as an inevitable act for defending unfair infringement against the defendant or as an act not violating social rules, and thus, the defendant's above assertion is rejected. The defendant's act cannot be seen as an inevitable act for defending unfair infringement against the defendant, and it is hard to view it as an inevitable act for defending the defendant's unfair infringement or it is not against social rules.

The reason for sentencing is that there is several previous meetings of the defendant for the reason of sentencing, the fact that the defendant first gets off a trial cost to the victim is disadvantageous, and that at the time, the victim would not pay the drinking value even though the victim would pay the drinking value, and the defendant will only put a table.