In the event that the Defendants did not pay the above fine, the Defendants did not pay the fine.

On October 12, 2014, at around 22:45, the Defendants: (a) reported that police officers F (53 years of age) belonging to the Guro Police Station in Seoul, Guro-gu, Seoul, and police officers G (46 years of age) belonging to the said police officers conducted a ditch; (b) confirmed the damage from the Defendants and taxi drivers; and (c) attempted to arrest Defendant A as a flagrant offender; and (d) Defendant B, “P”, “Phhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhn Fhnhhhhhhhhhhhh, hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, hnhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Prosecutorial suspect interrogation protocol against the Defendants

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to police statements made to H, F, and G;

1. Relevant Articles 136 (1) and 30 of the Criminal Act concerning facts constituting an offense. Article 136 (Selection of Fine for Negligence)

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

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

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, which committed the crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing order, is not easy since the crime of this case was committed by the police that the Defendants were arrested from the police as a flagrant offender, and the crime of this case was committed by using violence, such as the police officer’s breath, flading the breath by cutting off the bom and c

However, the Defendants, while under the influence of alcohol, led to any contingent crime, and all of the crimes in this court are led to confessions and repents in depth. Except this case, there is no power to commit any crime, except this case, to the police officers who have been killed in the truth, and agreed with them. In the case of Defendant A, the Defendants were to work in Korea with the ship yard and support the parents residing in China.