Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. At around 14:30 on December 7, 2011, the Defendant: (a) entered the said redevelopment office in front of the D redevelopment office located in Bupyeong-gu Incheon Bupyeong-gu, Incheon, and (b) entered the victim E (the age 33) who was seated on his/her string, saying, “The Defendant will make a strawer broadcast with the victim’s chest 80db below the age 80db”; (c) sealed the victim’s chest by hand; (d) sealed the victim’s fingers, skes, skes, and pushed the victim, and then pushed the victim, thereby causing injury to the victim, such as an an satonum, requiring treatment for about 14 days.

2. In the date and time set forth in paragraph 1, when two members are reported at a place, the Defendant publicly insultd the victim E by stating that “I am d't we see why I am d't we am d't want to am d't we am f't want to am d't we am d't we am f'.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of witness E and F;

1. Partial statement of witness G;

1. Statement of the police statement of E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the injury diagnosis certificate;

1. Relevant Articles 257 (1) and 311 of the Criminal Act concerning facts constituting an offense. Article 257 (Selection of Punishment of Fines)

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

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

1. The defendant and his defense counsel in determining the assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, arguing that the defendant did not injure the victim or insult the victim. However, according to the evidence above, the above charges of this case are recognized as sufficient proof, and thus, the above assertion is not accepted.

[E] In light of the existence, consistency, and attitude of legal statement of E and F, the statement seems to be reliable (H is the victim at the redevelopment office of this case in the court).