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

Where a defendant fails to pay a fine, one hundred thousand won shall be the day.

Punishment of the crime

On September 19, 2017, the Defendant, at around 13:00, sent back to the “E cafeteria” way in Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, which was operated by the Victim C (55) on September 19, 2017, at the front of the “E cafeteria” road in Guro-gu, Seoul. As a matter of compensation for the tent of the Defendant’s handbris, the Defendant was at the time of drinking and back to her face and back to her face.

As a result, the Defendant, who was unable to know the number of days of treatment to the victim C, caused the victim’s injury to his body.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness C, F and G;

1. On-site investigation (on-site investigation and CCTV investigation) report (the defendant's defense counsel asserts that the upper body suffered by C is naturally cured, and thus the crime of injury does not reach the level of injury.

However, injury in the crime of injury means that it damages the completeness of the body of the victim or interferes with physiological functions.

The crime of injury shall not be injured if there is no need to treat as a mere minor body accompanied by a assault, and there is no obstacle in natural therapy and daily life. However, this is premised on the fact that there is no assault to the same extent as the body of an injury ordinarily occurring in the daily life even if it does not exist. Thus, if a wound exceeding such degree is caused by an assault, it constitutes injury (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2007Do9794, Nov. 13, 2008; 2005Do1039, May 26, 2005). According to each of the above evidence, each of the above evidence reveals that: (a) the defendant was unable to recover from C’s face and parts at a time, and even if C did not have a hospital as the body of an injury, it can be acknowledged that his spouse was suffering from a disease that had not been treated separately by C.

It is difficult to see that the above mentioned above is an ordinary figure to the extent that the situation would normally occur in daily life.

Therefore, the defense counsel's above assertion is not accepted.

Application of Statutes

1. Criminal facts;