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 April 27, 2016, around 20:40 on April 27, 2016, the Defendant: A victim A (24 tax) who was passing by the Defendant, while smoking tobacco in the fluences adjacent to the coast roads located adjacent to the Namdong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Seoul.

The Defendant’s wife F, who was on the side, she was frightened by the victim on the ground that the breath is bad, she was frightened by the bat in his/her hand by bating the bat in his/her bat, and she was frightd by the Defendant’s bat in his/her bat, and her bat in his/her hand.

피고인은 피해 자로부터 멱살을 잡히자, 피해자의 손을 뿌리치고 몸을 밀쳐 피해자로 하여금 바닥에 엉덩방아를 찧게 하여 피해자에게 치료기간 미상의 요추 2번의 급성 압박 골절 등의 상해를 가하였다.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness G;

1. Each legal statement of the witness H and F;

1. Investigation report (pacted telephone call);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to prepare recording notes;

1. Article 257 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, Article 257 (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. At the time of determination on the assertion of the Defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the Defendant asserted that the Defendant’s act constitutes a legitimate defense against which illegality is denied, since the Defendant’s act constitutes a legitimate defense, inasmuch as the Defendant’s act was committed against an unjust attack, by setting up against H and his/her spouse’s damage, bating bat and causing bodily injury to H and his/her spouse, in a successive order. In such a process, the Defendant asserted to the purport that the Defendant’s act constitutes a legitimate defense against which illegality is denied.

In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, the injured party was in the situation where the Defendant was engaged in flapsing in order from H and the injured party at the time.