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

1. On May 15, 2015, around 14:52, Defendant A, in front of the meeting room of the occupants of the E apartment management office in Yangyang-si, on the ground that Defendant A took photographs of the scene where the victim B (52 cm) was divided into the victim B, the elderly chairperson F, and the managing warden G, while assaulting the victim’s vessel that he intends to get out of the meeting room of the occupants’ representatives, one time as his hand.

2. Defendant B was engaged in trial costs on the same date, time, and place as set forth in paragraph (1) and on the same ground, Defendant B would make a recording of the victim A (V, 51 years old).

At the same time, the market price, which is the owner of the victim, damaged one cell phone by lowering the floor of the unclaimed cell phone at the same time, in order to bring the victim to the close close to the face of the defendant, and bring about about about about about about two weeks of the victim's walk.

Summary of Evidence

[Defendant A]

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of the witness B;

1. Copy of the record [Defendant B]

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of a witness A, F, and H;

1. Copy of a record;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of an injury diagnosis certificate and estimate;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts;

A. Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act of Defendant A

B. Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of injury) and Article 366 of the Criminal Act (the point of damage to property)

1. Defendant B of the ordinary concurrence: Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Selection of each alternative fine for punishment;

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

1. Determination as to the assertion by the Defendant A and the defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of each of the Criminal Procedure Act in the provisional payment order

1. The gist of the assertion is only the fact that the victim had met himself/herself to prevent him/herself from carrying his/her ship at the time of the instant case, and thus does not constitute an assault or constitutes a legitimate defense.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence of the judgment, namely, the victim’s statement on the background and content of the instant assault, are specific and consistent.