1. Defendant A shall be punished by a fine of one million won.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A was a couple with the victim B(35 years) and the marriage six years marriage, and A was in a divorce lawsuit. On January 5, 2017, 2017, around 23:30, 1205, 1205, and 606, there was a demand to delete the conversation between the two parts of the victim's cell phones stored in the victim's cell phones, the husband, and the two parts of the victim's cell phones, and assaulted the victim's arms and shoulder with his hand.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of the witness B;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs of damaged parts;

1. Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 260 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime, the selection of fines;

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

1. Defendant A and his defense counsel’s assertion on the assertion of Defendant A and the defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order asserts that the injured party committed an assault against the said Defendant to attack the Defendant in order to avoid using the blick PC from the said Defendant, and that it constitutes a legitimate defense.

However, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, namely, that the defendant first saw the victim's cell phone from the victim to get off his cell phone, etc., and the victim continued to have suffered the victim and there was a vagabonds in the process despite the victim's attempt to get out of the victim's cell phone, the victim committed assault against the defendant in the course of the pagabonds.

Even if the defendant's act is an attack as an active attack beyond the limit of passive defense, there is a lack of reasonableness of the means and method of the act, and there is no balance between the protection interest and the infringement interest.

Therefore, since it does not constitute a legitimate defense, the defendant A and the defense counsel.