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

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

Punishment of the crime

At around 20:30 on September 27, 2013, the Defendant: (a) committed assault against the victim C (the age of 51) who was taking a taxi driving by the Defendant on the street in front of the Seongbuk-gu Seoul Southerndong 69-2 National Defense Venture (hereinafter referred to as “Seoul”) by asking the destination of the Defendant; (b) brought about a dispute with the victim in the course of asking the destination; (c) brought the victim at the vehicle along with the victim; and (d) the victim boomed the Defendant’s breath by taking the bridge, and b

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol regarding C;

1. Application of the Act and subordinate statutes to report an investigation (to analyze the binding and content of vehicle black boxes and video CDs, and to watch black boxes and video images);

1. Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes;

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

1. The assertion and judgment of persons involved in the litigation under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that, at the time of the instant case, the defendant was forced to commit an attack, such as flapsing, etc. from the victim first, the defendant committed an assault against the victim as described in the facts charged during his defense, and that, this constitutes a justifiable act that does not violate the victim's self-defense or social rules regarding an unfair harmful act.

2. In a case where it is reasonable to view that the perpetrator’s act was satisfy with one another’s intent to attack the victim’s unfair attack rather than with a view to defending the victim’s unjust attack, and that the act was committed against one another’s attack, and as such, it cannot be viewed as self-defense, since the act was at the same time a defensive act

(See Supreme Court Decision 2003Do4934 delivered on June 25, 2004). The following circumstances, which are acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account the health stand and the evidence presented in the judgment, namely, the motive and circumstance leading to the fighting of the Defendant and the victim, the circumstances before and after the fighting, and the degree of response to the victim of the Defendant.