The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Punishment of the crime

At around 02:20 on May 13, 2014, the Defendant, at the DPC room where the Defendant in Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, worked at the lower court, and on the ground that the victim E (56 years of age) prevented the Defendant from suffering from disturbance due to drinking, the Defendant, at his hand, sustained the victim’s face and her head on the part of the Defendant’s ship, while driving the Defendant’s hand on the part of the Defendant’s ship with his hand, resulting in the victim’s injury, such as the mouth of b8 days in need of medical treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol concerning the interrogation of suspects of E;

1. A written diagnosis of injury;

1. Application of the PC CCTV-related Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of penalties;

1. Penalty of a fine not exceeding 500,000 won to be suspended (10,00 won per day);

1. The defendant and his defense counsel's assertion against the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 59 (1) of the Criminal Code of the Suspension of Sentence (the defendant is the first offender, and his mistake is divided, and the crime of this case was caused by the victim's intentional action, and the defendant also suffered injury that requires medical treatment for about three weeks due to the victim) of the Criminal Code (the defendant and his defense counsel's aforementioned act are aimed at defending the present unfair infringement, and therefore the defendant's above act is reasonable, and therefore, it becomes unlawful as self-defense.

However, in order to establish self-defense under Article 21 of the Criminal Act, the act of defense should be socially reasonable, taking into account all specific circumstances, such as the type, degree, method of infringement, and the type and degree of legal interest to be infringed by the act of defense (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 92Do2540, Dec. 22, 1992). According to the foregoing evidence, the victim took the part of the Defendant’s jury and her head on the part of the Defendant.