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

Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

On March 31, 2017, the Defendant, around 14:05, brought about a dispute with the victim D's 14 dong 404 of Seongbuk-gu, Sungwon-si, Sungwon-si around 14:04 on March 31, 2017, and caused the victim's injury to the spawn, spacing, spacing, and spawn for over three weeks of treatment by spawning the victim's blap with satch, and satching the victim's hand.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The portion of the statement made by the witness D in the third public trial protocol;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. A written diagnosis of injury;

1. Photographs of each damaged part;

1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes to inquiries into facts (E regular task division, the National Health Insurance Corporation)

1. Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 257 (Selection of Penalty) of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The Defendant asserts to the effect that the Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion on Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order did not harm the victim’s breath, although the victim’s breath had breath, he did not do so.

In general, the injury diagnosis report submitted by the victim for the crime of injury is not sufficient to be a direct proof of the fact that the injury as stated in the medical professional knowledge was caused by the criminal act of the defendant after the doctor grasps the cause of the injury based on the victim's statement. However, in a case where the date and time of the diagnosis of the injury are close to the time and the time of the occurrence of the injury, there is no special circumstance to doubt the credibility of the injury, and where the part and degree of the injury as stated in the report are consistent with the cause and circumstance of the injury alleged by the victim, there is no circumstance to suspect the injury differently by the victim's assault from the third party at that time, etc., or the doctor is false.