In the event that the Defendants did not pay the above fines, only 100,000.

1. On June 23, 2013, Defendant A suffered injury, such as catum salt, etc., which requires two weeks of medical treatment, on the part of the victim B (n, 48 years of age) in Gwangju Northern-gu, in front of the Flaz., Defendant A had a dispute with the victim with respect to the price of the beer ordered in the singing room. Defendant A had a catum, fatum, the part on the right side of the victim was fatd, fatd, fatd, fatd, fatd the victim’s body, and fatd the victim’s body.

2. Defendant B suffered injury to the victim, such as light dump dump, etc., which requires approximately two weeks of medical treatment, by breaking the bump of the victim’s bump with the victim A (num, 45 years of age) on the date, time, place, and for the same reasons as set forth in paragraph (1).

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each legal statement of witness G, H and I;

1. Application of each statute described in the injury diagnosis report (A) and the injury diagnosis report (B);

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

1. The above defendant's assertion as to the defendant A of Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Code of the Trade Union and Labor House Detention Act is merely a fact that the defendant unilaterally committed an assault from the above defendant B and committed an act of cutting his head at the defense level. Thus, this constitutes self-defense. However, according to each of the above evidence, it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant committed an injury to the above defendant by doing the same act as the criminal facts stated in the judgment of the above defendant. The above defendant's act is not for the purpose of defending the defendant's unfair attack, but for the purpose of defending the defendant's unfair attack, and thus, it cannot be viewed as self-defense. Thus, the above argument is rejected.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.