A shall be punished by a fine for negligence of KRW 5,000,000, and by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

The above fine is imposed against the Defendants.

On June 16, 2017, around 01:35, the Defendants, while drinking alcohol at the D cafeteria located in Daegu-gun-gun C, had the victim E (45 years old) and the Defendants were seated by the tables. However, the Defendants, on the ground that Defendant A was faced with the chair.

Defendant

A, depending on the victim's hand floor, has been blicked once with the victim's left side, and Defendant B used the victim's bump with his hand at one time.

Accordingly, the Defendants jointly assaulted the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ legal statement

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. E statements;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to voluntary accompanying reports (Assaults), report on internal investigation (record No. 9 pages), and report on internal investigation (Attachment to photographs of victims);

1. The Defendants: Article 2(2)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act, and Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines for negligence

1. Defendants to be detained in the workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants of the Provisional Payment Order: (a) Defendant A, on the grounds of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, did not know even during the period of repeated crime; (b) committed the instant crime; (c) considering the circumstances that even around 2008 and around 2009, he/she was punished several times by a fine for committing violent crimes during the period of repeated crime, the liability for such crime is not weak.

In addition, Defendant B has already been punished two times or fine for violence crime in 2013.

However, the extent of assault that the Defendants used to commit the crime is relatively relatively minor, and the degree of damage suffered by the victim seems to be minor, the victim accepted the Defendants’ death penalty and expressed the Defendants’ intention not to punish the Defendants, and the Defendant A is bound to sentence punishment when choosing imprisonment with prison labor during the period of repeated crime. Considering the above circumstances, such outcome is excessive to Defendant A.