A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for four months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

around 12:00 on October 25, 2017, the Defendant was seated and fluored on his side, while he was seated in the front-time car of subway No. 1, subway No. 1, and was seated in the front-time car of subway No. 1, the Defendant left the seat facing the Defendant.

C assaulted the above C on the ground that C was able to escape immediately from the preceding vehicle on the ground that C was dynascing the Defendant, and immediately tried to escape from the preceding vehicle, the victim D (44 ) who was living in front of the preceding vehicle, and assaulted the chest of the above D on one occasion to prevent the Defendant from getting off from the preceding vehicle.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes in each protocol of examination of witnesses to C, D, and E;

1. Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting the crime, and Article 260 of the Criminal Act, and selection of imprisonment;

1. The defendant and his/her defense counsel regarding the assertion of the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution does not constitute a crime since the defendant's crime of this case is justified defense and thus illegal.

The argument is asserted.

However, according to each of the above evidence, as a result of the time between the defendant and the defendant who was sitting in the seat of the elderly and the defendant, C gave a warning to the defendant, and the dissatisfactions can be acknowledged that D's escape from subway was prevented in the front of the defendant's person, and the defendant abused D's assault.

Therefore, since the above act of the defendant cannot be deemed as a legitimate defense, the above argument is rejected (the defendant alleged to the effect that D was an indecent act by the defendant, and that D was an indecent act by the defendant, but in light of the above evidence, it is recognized that D was an indecent act by the defendant, who attempted to flee after the defendant's assaulted C, and that D was an indecent act by the defendant.

3) The part dismissing the prosecution

1. The Defendant’s summary of the instant facts charged is Seoul around 12:00 on October 25, 2017.