Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

1. On November 22, 2012, the Defendant, at around 00:15, committed assaulting the victim Category D (V) who is an employee in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju, on the ground that, even though he/she requested the president to do so, he/she did not lose his/her capacity.

2. The Defendant spits spits the face in the above temporary location on the ground that the victim E (E, South and 31 years of age) who is a guest is a woman at the time of a fighting.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on witness D and E's respective legal statements;

1. Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (an aggravated punishment for concurrent crimes with regard to D with heavy penalty), among concurrent crimes;

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

1. The defendant argues that the defendant's assertion of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that he/she has no spits or spits in E face.

However, the witness E is present in this court and the defendant specifically states spits spits in the situation at the time.

And the witness D also testified that the defendant spits or spits E in this law.

In addition, according to the evidence of the judgment, the fact that the defendant, who had been a guest at the time, was considerably interested in the drinking house on the ground that he was not the president of the drinking house.

In full view of these circumstances, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant spits it against E, and thus, the above argument by the Defendant is rejected.

The reason for sentencing is that there are circumstances to think that the defendant was treated disadvantageously in the police investigation process.

However, the defendant does not seem to reflect his mistake, and the victims are present at this court and the punishment of the defendant is still expressed.