Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

The defendant and the victim C were to drive a transit bus in D Co., Ltd., and the defendant was to pay each other for the reason that "the defendant made the representative who caused the traffic accident, and the victim made the statement that "the quid pro quo is discarded."

On May 2, 2015, the Defendant: (a) 08:30 on May 22, 2015, at the waiting room and parking lot of D Co., Ltd., Ltd., located in the wife population E, and (b) assaulted the victim by plucking the victim’s breath by pushing the victim’s breath and walking the victim’s hand.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of the witness C and F;

1. A protocol concerning the interrogation of suspect C by the police;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. Application of the photographic Acts and subordinate statutes;

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 assertion by the Defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The summary of the argument is that the defendant does not walk or pluck up the victim C's vessel, and there is no fact that the defendant does not pluck or pluck up the victim C's vessel, and the defendant only pushed the victim once in the article waiting room and the parking lot, and this is a crime committed against an unjust attack by the victim, and it does not constitute a legitimate defense or a legitimate act.

The argument is asserted.

2. The judgment was examined, and the victim C made a consistent and concrete statement from the police to the present court about the defendant's act, the content of damage, and the situation before and after the crime. There was no specific rationality in the contents of the statement, and there was no witness F made a statement corresponding to the victim's statement to the purport that "the defendant and the victim have observed fighting their bodies and bodies." (On the other hand, F was not likely to pluck up or pluck up the victim's ship or finger.)

The statements are made, but they are.