Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant was living together with the victim B from around December 30, 2014, and was filing a marriage report on August 10, 2015, and then is currently serving in a divorce lawsuit.

1. On August 14, 2016, the Defendant: (a) listened to the horses that “herely expact” from the victim (here, 39 years of age) in front of the elevator in front of the seat C hotel in Changwon-si; (b) live the victim’s face; and (c) live the victim’s face when taking care of the victim’s 14 days of her face by drinking, the Defendant damaged the victim by taking care of 14 days of live spacl and destroying at the same time, and destroying the victim’s inner diameter equivalent to KRW 60,000 of the market value on which the victim was worn.

2. On February 4, 2017, around 08:40 on February 4, 2017, the Defendant: (a) from the victim of the apartment unit D in Kimhae-si; (b) “I have no contact with the victim; (c) 40 years of age”;

B. Where it is sleep anywhere in the sleep with a new wall

B. It makes too difficult to do so.

“I hear the horses,” and in this light, there is no “I am, I am, I amp, I amp.” to the victim.

Hadro from Abane to be raised.

The term "the victim was the victim," and the victim was the victim, and the victim was assaulted.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of the witness B;

1. Statement made by the police against B;

1. A written diagnosis of injury;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs of a complainant's face, a warning receipt, a photo of a speaker, and a photograph of the victim's cell phone closure;

1. Article 257 (1), Article 366, and Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of each alternative fine for punishment;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

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

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order does not have any criminal record of the same kind, and there is no particular criminal record other than a fine imposed twice due to a violation of the Labor Standards Act and a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) even for a crime of this kind. In the case of a crime under Article 334(1) of the judgment, it is part of the circumstance of occurrence.