Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

At around 20:00 on January 1, 2018, the Defendant committed assault against the victim, such as the victim D(54 years of age)’s house in Ansan-si, and the parking problems of the above loan residents, etc., when the Defendant was punished by assaulting the victim. On the contrary, the Defendant used the victim’s spathical spath, and spathing the victim’s face by drinking.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of witness D, E, and F;

1. Application of the Act and subordinate statutes to investigative reports (to hear statements from reference witnesses - recording of telephone statements, and attaching recorded CDs);

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

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

1. Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Do13927, Dec. 8, 201) provides that the Defendant’s act constitutes self-defense. The Defendant’s defense counsel’s act constitutes a legitimate act for defense or self-defense. In light of the process of the instant fighting and its means of defense, etc., the Defendant’s act constitutes self-defense, barring special circumstances such as: (a) one party unilaterally makes an attack; and (b) the other party exercised tangible power as a means of resistance to protect himself/herself from such attack; and (c) one party’s act cannot be deemed as a legitimate act for defense or constitutes self-defense (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do13927, Dec. 8, 2011). In light of the process and means of the instant fighting, it cannot be seen that the Defendant’s act constitutes self-defense of defense.