However, for one year from the date this judgment became final and conclusive against the Defendants.

1. Defendant B, around 19:50 on October 10, 2016, as a result of a minor misunderstanding from the packaging horse of “E” in Busan-gu, Busan-gu, the Defendant was killed, thereby damaging the victim A (the age of 68)’s epib, and inflicted injury on the victim, such as an unexplosion for the number of days of treatment, upon drinking three times the victim’s face.

2. Defendant A, on the same day and at the same place, had the victim’s 70 years of age b (the victim’s bather bat) bat around the floor, and batd the victim’s bat, thereby causing injury to the victim, such as the number of days of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ legal statement

1. Prosecutorial suspect interrogation protocol against the Defendants

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning damaged parts and field photographing photographs;

1. Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 257 of the Election of Imprisonment;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution is serious in light of the fact that the Defendants committed the instant crime even though they had the same criminal record. However, the Defendants are led to the confession of the Defendants, the Defendants do not want the punishment under mutual agreement, the Defendants’ act of committing the instant crime was caused by minor misunderstanding as a relative, and the Defendants’ act of dispute was caused during the trial process, such as the Defendants’ age, occupation, criminal history, and attitude after the commission of the crime.