Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 1.5 million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

1. From around 00:05 on March 9, 2015, the injured Defendant: (a) around 00:30 on the same day, around 00:30 on the same day, she took a bath and took a brush on the floor on the ground that the victim E, a business owner, drinking a mixed alcoholic beverage, took two drinking bottles in a cooling house, cut off on the floor; (b) taken the crush from the cooling house to the left hand; (c) again, the injured Defendant saw the victim’s face at one time on the left hand, and put the victim into a brush part of the face of the frush requiring treatment for 14 days (on the right side of the flusium part of the flusium).

2. The Defendant: (a) caused the damage to property, at the time and place specified in paragraph (1), by falling off the brightness worn by the victim E on the floor; and (b) destroyed the brightness owned by the victim by cutting off the bridges by taking the bridges; and (c) thereby damaged the 100,000 won per repair dog.

3. The Defendant interfered with the business by force between 25 minutes of the victim E, such as: (a) the Defendant laid off one alcohol remaining in the Defendant’s drinking glass on the same ground as the date and time set forth in paragraph (1) at the time and place set forth in paragraph (1); and (b) the Defendant took a brupt and take a bath, and interfered with the victim E’s main business.

4. Around March 9, 2015, the Defendant was arrested as a flagrant offender at the fourth team office of the Sungnam Police Station of the Sungnam Police Station as stated in paragraphs (1) through (3), i.e., 1259, as the Sungnam-gu, Manam-si.

When F of the above police station assistant F of the defendant tried to prepare an interrogation protocol against the defendant, the defendant is able to take a bath to three other cases, such as G who was examined by the above police station for other cases.

From police officers, they were asked for a challenge.

Since then, the Defendant, a police officer who conducted an investigation in the state of G, etc., expressed that the victim F, who was a police officer, would be in accordance with the principle of bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch son, farb son, and farb son, who was in the state of G, etc., would be in accordance with the doctrine of “I would like to take farb bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch,” and the victim