Defendant shall be punished by a fine of one million won.

If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

On May 12, 2012, around 23:30 on the road in Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, the Defendant tried to board a F-business taxi operated by the victim E (E, 55 years old), along with E-gu D, on the road, and the victim was unable to go to the Gyeonggi-si, and the Defendant saw the victim's face with his/her hand off, cut off the victim's her mother and her inner diameter one time, and cut off the victim's face with her hand.

As a result, the defendant suffered injury to the victim, such as the right completion part, which requires treatment for about 14 days.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. Statement of the police officer to E (Simplified violence);

1. An explanatory invoice;

1. Application of statutes on photographs of damage;

1. Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes;

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

1. Judgment on the assertion by the Defendant and the defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the defendant was aboard the taxi at the rear seat of the taxi and the victim was refused to take the destination, so that the victim was able to take this part of the defendant's body and the victim was able to remove the defendant's body from the outside by putting the neck of the defendant's body, and that there was no fact that the defendant exceeded her mother and her face and has not been taken off.

2. However, according to the above evidence, the victim is found to be a person with Maliba who is a person with disabilities to be examined one neck, and reported this case to the police at the victim's side, and the defendant was accompanied by her friendship at the time. Considering the above facts, it is difficult to view that there is no credibility in the argument that the victim, who is the disabled, was able to produce it out of the taxi because she was a witness only of the defendant's friendship, and it is difficult to view that the victim reported it to the police by leaving the damaged fact in the situation where

(b).