A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant was married on May 16, 1986 with the victim C (math, 50 years old) and on May 16, 1986, but currently is still pending a divorce lawsuit.

On June 13, 2016, the Defendant: (a) around 21:10 on June 13, 2016, in the “E” operated by the Defendant and the victim, the Defendant brought an installment savings passbook to the Defendant; (b) took place at his own will to restrain the Defendant; and (c) opened the two arms of the victim to cut off the said passbook; and (d) opened the victim so that it can no longer be sufficiently divided into the victim.

Accordingly, the defendant assaulted the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Entry of a defendant in part in the protocol of second public trial;

1. The legal statement of the witness C;

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

1. Relevant Article 260 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Determination on the assertion by the Defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The Defendant alleged that he/she had the head of the Tong, which the victim had, tried to deduct him/her of the wall, but did not allow him/her to leave the wall so far as he/she continues to grow, as stated in the facts charged in this case, after he/she divided the two arms of the victim as stated in the instant facts charged.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court, the following circumstances are acknowledged: ① The victim has been consistently stated by the investigative agency to the effect that “the defendant has been equally divided to prevent him from getting out of the victim’s name.” ② The defendant also made a statement (Evidence No. 21 of the evidence record) to the effect that “the victim was forced to get off the victim’s passbook because he did not get out of the passbook,” and the defendant also made a statement (Evidence No. 21 of the evidence) to the effect that “the victim was forced to get out of the passbook because he did not get out of the passbook.” The victim also recognized the fact that there was a ditch to get off the victim’s passbook at the time of the instant case, and ③ the victim.