The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged is the employee of DNA personal seal C in the following cities:

On September 22, 2014, the Defendant: (a) around 22:30 on September 7, 2014, the victim E (here, 45 years of age) was under the influence of alcohol to scam the front lights, etc.; and (b) in such a case, the Defendant had a duty of care to prevent the victim from being able to file a petition with the victim; (c) to scam the front lights, etc. for ordering use; or to force the victim to deprive him of the front lights, etc. for ordering use.

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not file a petition with the victim by getting off the front line or soliciting him to do so, and caused the victim to have his strong hand over the part of the victim, which cited the front line, etc. for the use of the order, and caused the victim to suffer an external wound of the left part, which requires approximately five weeks of treatment.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion did not commit any negligence on the ground that there was no fact that the Defendant had satisfly cut off the victim’s satisfe by putting the victim’s strong finger

B. In a judgment of conviction in a criminal trial, the conviction ought to be based on evidence of probative value, which leads a judge to have a conviction that is beyond a reasonable doubt, to such a degree that the facts charged are true. Therefore, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof fails to sufficiently reach the degree that such conviction would lead to, the determination ought to be based on the defendant’s benefit even if there

(Supreme Court Decision 201Do15767 Decided February 13, 2014, etc.). According to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, the fact that the Defendant was deprived of the electric power failure, etc. while under the influence of alcohol is recognized.

However, the above evidence is admitted as follows.