Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, the amount of KRW 100,000 shall be paid.

Punishment of the crime

On December 12, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years in the Daejeon District Court for a violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning Regulation and Punishment of Speculative Acts, Etc., and the judgment became final and conclusive on December 20, 2013.

피고인은 2013. 10. 22. 22:00경 대전 서구 C에 있는 D 음식점 안에서, 피해자 E(34세)이 자신에게 대든다는 이유로, 주먹으로 꿀밤 때리듯이 피해자의 머리를 2~3회 때리고, 위 음식점 밖으로 나와 주먹으로 피해자의 얼굴을 1~2회 때려 피해자에게 약 6주간의 치료가 필요한 우측 하악 골체부의 골절 등의 상해를 가하였다.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness E and F;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused;

1. Statement of the police statement of E;

1. Each injury diagnosis letter;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: The application of criminal records and investigation reports, and statutes;

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

1. Selection of a selective fine for punishment (the defendant who has committed the instant crime during the period of suspension of execution of punishment shall be punished strictly, however, considering the fact that there are some circumstances to consider the circumstances leading to the instant crime, the fact that the criminal situation is relatively minor, etc., the punishment shall be imposed heavily only once);

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion under Article 70(1) of the Criminal Act for the confinement in the workhouse, the Defendant asserts that the act of the Defendant in this case was done to prevent assault and protect his body, and constitutes a legitimate act that constitutes a legitimate defense or that does not go against social norms. Thus, according to the records of this case, the act of the Defendant in this case constitutes a case where there is considerable reason for the act of the Defendant in this case to defend or prevent current unfair infringement.

Since there is no basis to regard it as an act within the permissible range in light of social norms, the above argument of the defendant is accepted.