A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

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

Punishment of the crime

On April 29, 2018, the Defendant: (a) around 12:40, at a bath located in C on April 29, 2018, the victim D (58 tax) who is the owner of the business and had a conflict with each other with the victim D (58 tax). While the victim had a flab, flab, etc. of the Defendant’s flab, flab, against the flab, and flab, etc. of the victim by asking the victim’s left hand hand, etc., and caused the victim’s loss to be

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Partial statement of the witness D;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of suspects of D;

1. A medical certificate;

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

1. Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 257 (Selection of Penalty) of the Criminal Act;

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

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the defendant's assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order constitutes a legitimate defense since the defendant committed an act that the defendant could not cover the breath by breathing the breath from the injured party.

In order to establish defense by a political party, the act of defense must be socially reasonable, taking into account all specific circumstances, such as the type, degree, method of infringement, level of infringement, and type and degree of legal interest to be infringed by the act of defense (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 92Do2540, Dec. 22, 1992; 2006Do3222, Oct. 26, 2006). In full view of the circumstances that can be recognized by taking into account the above evidence, the victim’s grandchildren, etc. cannot be deemed as a socially considerable act, and thus, the Defendant’s judgment cannot be deemed as a legitimate defense.

Under the premise different from this, the prior defendant and his defense counsel's assertion is without merit.