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

The defendant and the victim C (the age of 58) did not have a relationship with the noise noise between ordinary people on the upper floor of apartment.

On August 17, 2012, the Defendant, at around 21:00, had a dispute between the victim and the noise in front of 103 Dong 602, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, which is the Defendant’s residence.

Accordingly, the Defendant sought to close the door from the house to the outside of the house, and the victim suffered bodily injury, such as pressing the victim by committing violence, such as pressing the victim, etc., while trying to enter the house of the Defendant, and causing the victim to undergo approximately eight weeks of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. C’s legal statement;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Each police statement of C and E;

1. A complaint;

1. Application of C bodily injury diagnosis certificates and C Medical Treatment Art Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 262, 260 (1) and 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of criminal facts;

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act has no record of criminal punishment against the defendant; the defendant deposited KRW 3,00,000 in the victim's future for the repayment of damage; the motive and background of the crime in this case; the character and conduct of the defendant; and the family environment shall be determined in consideration of various circumstances.

Defendant

The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the act of this case constitutes self-defense. However, in light of the motive and circumstance leading up to the crime of this case, the means and method of the crime of this case, and the degree and result of the victim's injury, etc., the defendant's act of this case cannot be deemed as an act to defend the victim's unfair infringement. Thus, the above assertion by the defendant and his defense counsel cannot be accepted.