Defendant 1 (Defendant of the Supreme Court’s judgment) and one other

The Minister of Justice shall hold a public trial on the grounds that he/she was guilty of his/her indictment.

Public-service Advocates et al. and one other

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

When Defendant 1 fails to pay the above fine, the defendant shall be confined in a workhouse for the period converted by 50,000 won into one day.

The provisional payment of the amount equivalent to the above fine shall be ordered.

Acquittal of the charge of violating the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (collectively, deadly, etc.) among the charges against Defendant 1.

Defendant 2 (Supreme Court’s judgment of the court below) is dismissed.

Defendant 1, who is a co-principal of Defendant 2, was the victim, and was the victim’s wife, Nonindicted 1 (the Nonindicted Party in the judgment of the Supreme Court) and the victim’s wife in Gwangju Southern-gu (hereinafter omitted), did not appear to be mutually between the victim and the victim due to the distribution of profits.

At around 17:50 on September 26, 2010, Defendant 1 consulted with the victim in the coffee shop in Nam-gu, Gwangju (hereinafter referred to as “Seoul”) and went to the said coffee shop parking lot, and thereafter, the victim exercised violence by exercising force, such as scambling with Defendant 1’s hand with his hand, thereby putting the victim over the floor by hand and putting the victim over the floor for about two weeks in need of treatment.

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of suspect against the defendant 2;

1. A written diagnosis of injury;

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act, Selection of a fine

1. Detention in a workhouse;

Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Order of provisional payment;

Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. Facts charged;

At around 17:50 on September 26, 2010, Defendant 2: (a) filed a complaint from Defendant 1 at a coffee shop in Nam-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter referred to as “Seoul Special Metropolitan City”), Defendant 2, “I am flishing to the father, so you do so,” and Defendant 2, among the disputes between the victim and the victim, had the victim go on a coffee parking lot, and had the hand floor of the victim go on a hand at a time, so that the victim’s knickbbbbbbbs can be treated for approximately two weeks.

2. Determination

The defendant asserts that there is no fact that the victim used violence against the victim. According to the statement of the victim's wife photograph, injury diagnosis, medical certificate, medical record copy certificate, etc., it is recognized that the victim suffered multiple scambucks on the left-hand side before and after the date of the charge. Thus, the issue of this case is whether the victim suffered injury as above due to the defendant's act, and there are statements in the investigation agency and court of the victim's witness non-indicted 1 and the victim's investigative agency and court. Accordingly, it is examined whether the above witness's statement is credibility or not.

In light of the following circumstances, i.e., the date and time the victim claims injury is around 17:50 on September 26, 2010; the time the police officer called out with Nonindicted 3 to the effect that the victim would have been in violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act; ② Nonindicted 2 was in violation of the above provision on the part of the Defendant and Nonindicted 3, 6, 5, and 4’s each legal statement and each copy of the 112 criminal report receipt and treatment statement, penalty payment register, and offender notification statement; ④ Nonindicted 2 was in violation of the above provision on the charge of embezzlement, and Nonindicted 3 was in violation of the Act on the Punishment of Minor Offenses, and Nonindicted 6 was in violation of the above provision on the charge of assault and 40 minutes before the time of the accusation, and there was no other evidence that the victim was in violation of the above provision on the charge of embezzlement.

1. Facts charged;

At around 18:00 on September 26, 2010, Defendant 1 expressed the attitude that Defendant 2 would be able to injure the body of the victim by putting in hand the transition (10cm in knife length, 2cm in knife) dangerous goods in the above 00 ○○○○○○ used room operated by the above non-indicted 1, while driving away from the victim, and threatening Defendant 1’s body.

2. Determination

Defendant 1 and his defense counsel asserted that since the defendant reported to the police of this case to the police and paid the penalty in return for the notice of penalty payment of KRW 50,000 to the violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act (mix of sound address) on the same day, this case constitutes a final judgment and thus, the judgment of acquittal should be pronounced.

According to the above statement of the defendant, the defendant's legal statement, the non-indicted 3, 2, and 6's each legal statement, each 12 report receipt and treatment table, and the offender's report, etc., ① the defendant left a beauty room as stated in the facts charged, and the victim immediately fleded at a lab, and the defendant was able to find out the victim while taking excessive charge of non-indicted 3 and 2, ② the defendant tried to knife the above non-indicted 3 and 2 on the same way as the above facts charged, and the defendant tried to knife his knife his knife and knife his knife his knife on the same day as the above facts charged, and the defendant reported his knife knife to the non-indicted 1 and 112, and the defendant reported his knife's remaining knife knife to the same day by 17:16, etc.

However, according to Article 7(3) of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act, any person who pays a penalty after receiving a notice of penalty payment disposition shall not be punished again for the same offense, which recognizes the effect corresponding to the final judgment of the payment of penalty by the above notice disposition.

Ultimately, the charged facts of this case shall be sentenced to acquittal in accordance with Article 326 subparagraph 1 of the Criminal Procedure Act because they fall under the time the final judgment became final and conclusive.

Judges Park Blue-min

Note 1) The victim stated at the investigative agency that he was about 30 meters away, and Nonindicted 3 stated that Nonindicted 3 was about 70 meters away.

2) Article 1 Subparag. 25 of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act (mix disturbance, etc.) provides that a person who, under the influence of alcohol, behaves in the surroundings by uttering or doing rough words or conducts, or who, without good cause, spirits another person without any justifiable reason, serves as a penalty for a fine not exceeding KRW 100,000,000, penal detention, or a minor fine, at a place where many people gather or frequent, such as a public hall, theater, restaurant, etc., or on a train, motor vehicle, ship, etc.