Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 300,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

On October 7, 2012, the Defendant: (a) around 13:15, at the second floor of the D Religious Organization Epic in Daejeon Seo-gu, Daejeon; (b) at the second floor, the victim F (53 years of age) was faced with the victim G (or the 46 years of age) by the two descendants of the defect that the victim F (53 years of age) intends to come to the end to the end of his/her speech about the Defendant; and (c) the victim’s chest part was pushed down with the victim G (or the 56 years of age) by the two descendants of the defect that the victim intends to go to the end.

In addition, the defendant taken a dynamic image from the side to the mobile phone at one time as her hand.

As a result, the Defendant assaulted the above F, and inflicted injury on the said G, such as “damage to frochisity of ice digging,” which requires approximately two weeks of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the accused by the prosecution (including the cross-examination part);

1. Statement of each police statement related to F and G;

1. An injury diagnosis certificate;

1. Application of the video CD-related Acts and subordinate statutes

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act, Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of injury), Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of violence), the selection of each fine for the crime;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The defendant and his/her defense counsel's assertion of the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order asserts that the defendant's act constitutes an inevitable act to the extent that it is inevitable to handle church affairs as the legitimate defense act or the above church member as a legitimate act.

In full view of the above evidence, it can be recognized that the defendant assaulted or injured the victims as stated in the facts constituting a crime.

In light of the circumstances and contents of the instant crime, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant’s act was due to the combined intent of attack and defense against the victims, even if not, the Defendant’s act was the act of self-defense.