A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

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

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is the first space between the victim B (the age of 26) and the road.

After drinking with the victim, the defendant was living together with the victim, and the victim was living in the direction different from his/her destination, and the victim was living in the direction different from his/her destination.

On January 22, 2014, at around 04:15, the Defendant assaulted the victim’s chest by hand while she had a verbal dispute with the victim for the aforementioned reasons at the front of the 270 Green Gas Station, Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul, Seoul.

As a result, the victim suffered an injury in the number of treatment days where the 20m chinum is teared by the floor while getting off the floor and faced with the chin.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of the witness B;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to on-site reports;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 262 and 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of punishment;

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

1. The defendant asserts that the defendant's assertion of Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is legitimate defense made in the process of removing the victim's chest at the time of the instant case, however, the defendant asserts that it is legitimate defense made in the process of the victim's breaking the defendant and removing the defendant.

In order to establish self-defense as stipulated in Article 21 of the Criminal Act, the act of defense must be socially reasonable, taking into account all specific circumstances, such as the type, degree, method, and type and degree of the legal interest infringed by the act of infringement, and the kind and degree of the legal interest to be infringed by the act of defense.

(See Supreme Court Decision 92Do2540 delivered on December 22, 1992, etc.). However, according to the evidence as seen earlier, it is reasonable to view the Defendant’s aggressive act beyond a simple defense act as an attack, since the Defendant’s aggressive act was committed beyond a aggressive act.