Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 300,000 won.

If the above fine is not paid, one hundred thousand won shall be converted into one day.

Punishment of the crime

On May 5, 2016, at around 21:40, the Defendant was in a situation where E (the 55-year-old age) who was a customer was at the seat of the victim H (the 55-year-old-old-old-si) and the husband’s wife’s fighting with a large interest rate, and the Defendant was at home. However, as the Defendant’s wife is her wife, he/she acted as if he/she were at home. However, as he/she did, he/she did so by pushing the I’s right shoulder in both hands, thereby going beyond the floor, and continuously resisting the victim H (the 55-year-old-old-old-old-age-old-age-old-age-age-age-age-age-age-age-age-age-age-age-old-age-based-age-related-age-related-related-related-related-related-related-related-related-related-related-related-related-related-related-related-related-related-related-related-related-related-related-related-related-related-

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness E, H, J, and K;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. The replacement part of E and H among the police interrogation protocol against the accused;

1. Each police statement of H, E, or L;

1. A complaint;

1. Investigation report (M telephone communications);

1. Application of medical certificates of each injury to H, medical records, and written request for medical treatment to H;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 262, 260 (1) and 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of criminal facts;

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

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion of the provisional payment order under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the Defendant argues that the victim H’s inside and balone were merely self-defense because he did not have causation with the Defendant’s act of breathing with falth and balone, or the victim’s act of defense against the Defendant’s act of attack under the influence of alcohol. However, according to each of the above evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, it is sufficiently recognized that the injury of H’s inside and balone, etc. was due to the Defendant’s act of attacking the Defendant’s criminal facts, which