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

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

At around 01:20 on May 10, 2012, the Defendant: (a) considered the victim to be neglected in the process of getting on and off the said taxi at the “F Hospital” in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu; (b) considered the victim to be neglected; and (c) caused damage to said taxi to KRW 910,162 on the repair cost by putting the said taxi at the front and rear glass of the said taxi in front of the said taxi in front of the said passenger.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Protocol concerning suspect interrogation of C;

1. Statement of each police statement related to C and G;

1. Written estimate of damage;

1. Application of the statutes on the attachment of photographs of damaged taxi;

1. Article 366 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes;

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

1. Judgment on the Defendant’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The summary of the argument was set up between Defendant 1 and C at the time and place indicated in the above facts constituting the crime. However, C was trying to get off and depart from the above taxi and thereby obstructed G, which is the Defendant’s working day, in front of the foregoing taxi, and C continued to run the above taxi as it was, and G was under the supervision of the above taxi. Accordingly, the Defendant saw that G was dangerous, and the Defendant saw that it was a tree board to stop the above taxi, thereby damaging the convenience of the taxi as above.

Therefore, the defendant's act is not illegal as self-defense or legitimate act.

2. According to the evidence revealed by the Defendant, the fact that C transferred the above taxi on the bridge part of the above taxi G in front of the above taxi can be acknowledged. However, according to the above evidence, the time order of the case is not that of C’s bridge as a taxi, and the Defendant did not damage the convenience of the above taxi with the wooden board, but the Defendant first gets off and damaged the glass of the above taxi with the wooden board, and C intending to get out of the above taxi.