The sentence against the accused shall be 2,00,000 won.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine.

Punishment of the crime

At around 00:30 on March 15, 2013, the Defendant: (a) committed assault against the victim, such as drinking and eating on the street in front of “D” operated by the victim C(40 years of age) in Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City; (b) he demanded the victim to pay for the value of food; and (c) prevented the victim from escape; and (d) assaulted the victim, such as drinking and drinking on the street; and (e) flabing the victim’s flaps; and (e) flabing the victim

In this regard, the defendant suffered from the victim's gambling, which requires approximately two weeks of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. C’s legal statement;

1. Application of a medical certificate of injury, an injury part photograph, and Acts and subordinate statutes on receipts;

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's argument regarding the defendant's assertion under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is that the defendant's act was against the victim's improper attack, and thus, the defendant's act constitutes self-defense. However, the defendant's act without paying food value as stated in the judgment cannot be deemed as an unjust attack, and the defendant's act cannot be deemed as legitimate self-defense, such as overcoming the breath of the victim's breath, and thus, it cannot be viewed as self-defense.

Although the degree of damage caused by the reason for sentencing is not so significant, the defendant can have the same power, and assault the defendant without paying food value, and there are no circumstances to consider the background of the crime. In full view of the following acts after the crime of this case and the speech and behavior from the crime of this case to the court, it cannot be deemed that the fine of two million won under the summary order of this case is more severe, and thus, the above fine is imposed as it is.