A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months, and imprisonment with prison labor for one and half years.

However, as to the Defendants, this is against the Defendants.

On January 25, 2013, at around 01:10, the Defendants changed the room from the “Enoba” located in the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City D2 level to the business owner F, but the Defendants, on the ground that F, was refusing to engage in the business because F, was the end of the business.

The victim G(34 years of age) is deemed to be influence due to the alcohol value, and thus, the defendants calculated the alcohol value to the defendants, and the defendants A scam with the victim's hand floor several times, and the defendants B scam with the victim's scam as a dangerous object.

The Defendants continued to see that the victim H(33 years of age) who is a daily behavior of G was able to take the face of the victim by drinking on the ground that he said victim H(33 years of age).

As a result, the Defendants jointly (the Defendant B carried dangerous articles) put the victim G at the inner in which the number of days of treatment is unknown, and put the victim H on the right studio, which requires approximately two weeks of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. The police suspect interrogation protocol of H;

1. Each police statement concerning G and F;

1. Seizure records;

1. A certified copy of medical records; and

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on the certificate of injury, and photographs of injured parts;

1. Article 2 (2) and (1) 3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of joint injury, the choice of imprisonment): Defendant B: Article 2 (2) and (1) 3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of joint injury, the choice of imprisonment), Articles 3 (1) and 2 (1) 3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Articles 257 (1) and 257 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of personal injury);

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

1. Defendant B’s discretionary mitigation: Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants of suspended execution: The reason for sentencing of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is that the nature of the crime in this case is not that of the crime.