Defendant shall be punished by a fine of three million won.

If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be added.

Criminal facts

On September 22, 2016, around 10:40, the Defendant found the victim on September 2, 2016, on the ground that, at the trade office, the company 205, Cho Jong-ho, Inc., Inc., 205, located in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju, had contact D with the victim C(52 tax) in relation to the legal dispute with the victim C(52 tax) and the victim C(52 tax).

"......... the victim threatened the victim's face by taking the victim's hand over his/her left hand in order to prevent any defect in recording the victim's telephone.

Accordingly, the defendant committed assault against the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of witness C and E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to prosecutorial investigation reports (to hear and report voice recording files submitted to victims) and sound recording files;

1. Relevant Article 260 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act selection of punishment, and selection of fines;

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

1. Determination on the Defendant’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The summary of the assertion is that the defendant does not call a victim C to make a threat to the victim C.

However, there is no fact that there is no threat to the victim's face, as the victim's fingers or knifes the victim's fingers.

2. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the defendant's above assertion by the defendant cannot be accepted, since it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant committed assault to the victim as stated in the judgment of the court.

A. The victim since the police, and consistently reached this court, “The victim tolds the Defendant that he should keep a cell phone, thereby making the Defendant take the left hand of the victim citing a cell phone and cutting the victim’s cell phone by other hand.

In order for the injured to not take the cell phone, it would be said that “the damage of a flag is the damage of a flag.”