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

C On February 8, 2014, around 06:0, around 06:00, in a street near Ulsan-gu D, Ulsan-gu, and assaulted E. A. A. A. A. A. A. B. B. F, one of E, took a horse’s head of the horse F, kne and kne face, etc., knee and kne face, etc. for the same reason, he continued to take the victim G (17 years of age) and H in each drinking face and body.

The defendant reported that C takes the F, etc. at the same time, at the same place, and took part in it when he takes the face of the victim G.

As a result, the defendant and C suffered bodily injury, such as the inner part, which requires approximately three weeks of medical treatment in case of each victim G.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Recording of G statements in the fourth public trial records;

1. Each statement made by I and F in the third public trial records;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of partially the accused by the prosecution;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of each police statement protocol to I;

1. Article 257 (1) and Article 263 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Selection of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act (a) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of the Aggravated Punishment, a defendant and his/her defense counsel asserted to the effect that he/she did not assault the victim, but the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court, i.e., the victim has consistently suffered violence from the defendant from the investigative agency to

(2) At an investigative agency, I witness the victim's face in a dubbling and drinking.

In the case of statements (2°23 pages of evidence records) and in the court, the defendant's assaulted facts were observed.

(3) The witness testimony that the defendant made a fighting together with the defendant, while the J did not have been designated as the perpetrator, while the defendant has been consistently classified by the victim, etc., and ④ the defendant has the right to fighting.