Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

On May 4, 2013, around 05:30 on May 4, 2013, the Defendant: (a) took a bath in the “Dju store” located in Daejeon-gu Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu, and (b) took care of the flab, and (c) took care of the flab, and took care of the flab, the flab, the flab, and the flab, and the flab, the flab, the flab, and the flab, the flab

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Protocol concerning the examination of each police suspect with respect to E or F;

1. Investigation report (investigation accompanied by photographs of damage);

1. Investigation report (Investigation of witness's statement at the scene of the case);

1. Application of each injury diagnosis certificate (E) statute;

1. Relevant Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

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

1. The defendant and his/her defense counsel's assertion on the claim of the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act asserts that the defendant did not have inflicted an injury on the victim by assaulting the victim as stated in the facts of crime, and even if the victim exercised the tangible power, such act of the defendant is merely a passive resistance responding to the victim's assault and therefore constitutes a legitimate act under

In full view of the above evidence, the defendant's act of assaulting the victim as stated in the facts charged can be acknowledged as having inflicted an injury. In light of the circumstances and contents of the crime, it is reasonable to view that the defendant's act was due to the mixed intention of attacking the victim, and even if not, it cannot be viewed as a justifiable act as a passive resistance. Thus, the defendant's and the defense counsel's above assertion is rejected.