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

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is the owner of a pet frenchus.

Any person has a duty of care to take safety measures, such as a necker and ring, when the owner, etc. of an animal subject to registration is accompanied by an animal subject to registration and going out of the country.

Nevertheless, on April 26, 2020, the Defendant sent to the pet dog of the victim C (Woo, 25 years old) (Woo-gu) who was faced with the pet dog, accompanied by the pet dog without fixing the neck properly, and went out due to the negligence of going out.

Accordingly, the part of the victim, such as the victim, was put in the defendant's dog.

As a result, the Defendant suffered from the above negligence the injury of the open upper part of the wall after the plebling that requires approximately two weeks of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Photographs of the police's statement C by the legal witness C of the defendant's partial statement in court, and on-site photographs of the defendant;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to medical certificates;

1. Article 266 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, Article 266 (1) of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines, and the selection of fines;

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

1. The summary of the Defendant’s assertion on the assertion of the Defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act does not constitute a master dog where the Defendant ought to open to the court, and there was no obligation to open to the court, and the Defendant was in a state where he/she did so at the time. Therefore, there was no negligence that the Defendant did not control the above opening.

2. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances revealed in full view of the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the Defendant neglected his duty of care to manage the Defendant’s opening and going out of the country so that he does not interfere with others.

It is reasonable to view it.

Therefore, the defendant and defense counsel's assertion cannot be accepted.

(1) A person who goes out and going out of a dog shall be identified as a dog he/she manages.