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

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

Punishment of the crime

On December 29, 2012, around 09:40 on December 29, 2012, the Defendant found the victim D (at the age of 73) who is the owner of the building at the Defendant’s residence located in Leecheon-si C building 102, and demanded the payment of management expenses by cutting down the victim and cutting down the victim above the floor and cutting down the flab on the ship, and carried out the flabing dives for about two weeks to the right string, etc.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness E and D;

1. Each protocol concerning the examination of the accused by the prosecution (including the substitution of the accused);

1. A written statement;

1. Suspect A and D photographs;

1. Investigation report (F telephone conversations for reference);

1. Bodily damaged photo;

1. Determination on the Defendant’s and his defense counsel’s assertion

1. The alleged victim constitutes self-defense to defend himself/herself by leaving his/her behavior.

2. In a case where it is reasonable to view that the perpetrator’s act of attacked with one another’s intent to attack the victim’s unfair attack rather than to defend the victim’s unfair attack, and that the act of attacked with one another’s intent to attack and went against it, the act of attacked with the nature of the act of attack at the same time, and thus, it cannot be deemed as self-defense or excessive defense

(See Supreme Court Decision 200Do228 Decided March 28, 2000, etc.). In light of various circumstances, the Defendant and the victim knew of this case’s health class and each of the above evidence as to the management expenses, namely, the circumstance that the Defendant and the victim took a bath with each other as to the management expenses, and the victim’s statement was not distorted. However, the Defendant’s act of cutting the elderly victim over the floor and cutting on the upper part of the ship cannot be seen as pure defensive acts, and the victim cannot be seen as unilaterally assaulting the Defendant. Thus, the Defendant’s act at the same time constitutes self-defense. Thus, the above assertion cannot be seen as legitimate self-defense.