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

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

On June 14, 2016, the Defendant neglected his duty of care to manage the opening of the opening so as not to harm others while having opened the opening in front of C in Namyang-si, Namyang-si, and caused the said opening to ask the victim D's buckbucks where he had been operating the opening, thereby causing the victim to suffer injury, such as d's d'bucks, before discharge on the right side, which requires approximately three weeks of medical treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of the witness D;

1. Medical certificate and each photograph (Mat, D);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to inquiries, such as criminal history;

1. Article 266 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, Article 266 (1) of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines, and the selection of fines;

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

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning the order of provisional payment;

1. The Defendant and the defense counsel asserted that the issue of the main text of Article 186(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act regarding the cost of lawsuit is the fact that the Defendant’s opening was a victim, but this was caused by the negligence of the victim, and that the Defendant was not negligent by performing his/her duty of care to manage the dog.

In other words, the victim, from the investigative agency to the court, i.e., the following circumstances acknowledged by this court by integrating the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, i.e., the victim, from the investigative agency to the court, i.e., the Defendant was going in front of the house when she was coming to the front of the house.

“In the course of making the word, I went through the side while making it possible to see the side, and they also see the right bridge to tightly pushed down with the right bridge in the course of going beyond it.

At the time, a relatively concrete and consistent statement is made with regard to the current situation, etc. at the time to the effect that the Defendant was holding a dog, but he is unable to cope with the force, etc., and ② the instant case.