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

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

1. On April 24, 2011, the Defendant made a statement to the effect that, around 10:30 on April 24, 2011, the Defendant spits the victim E (Namnam and the age of 15) who is the said D D D D D D D D D D D D D D DD, toward the outside of the church bus due to the problem of spits the spits, the Defendant considered that the Defendant spits the victim in a bus to the effect that he was spits the victim in a bus, and the victim also made a statement to the effect that he spits the victim in a bus, and the victim also made a statement that he spits the victim out of the bus at the time of the police, he/she is aware of the developments of the

With a bad hand, the victim's left side bucks three times, shakes the victim's head on one occasion with his left hand, and assaulted the victim by putting the breath on the victim's head on one occasion with his hand.

2. On May 8, 2011, the Defendant: (a) committed assault on May 8, 201, 201, on the part of the Defendant: (b) around 18:40, on the part of the Defendant: (c) committed assault against the victim by putting the victim’s flaps into the wall by putting the victim’s epibro, and by making the victim’s left inside part of the wall one time with the left hand.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol concerning the police interrogation of the accused;

1. Statement of the police statement of E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a complaint, each photograph (no. 9 pages for the investigation records of cases No. 2011, 590);

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

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 defense counsel asserted on the assertion of the defendant and defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order. At the time, the defendant and his defense counsel alleged that the spit of spits, such as the entries in the facts charged, was assaulted at the level that the spits in the E church bus towards the nature of the spits in the E church bus at the time. Thus, this assertion is alleged to the effect that it constitutes a justifiable act that does not violate social rules.