A A shall be punished by a fine of three million won, by imprisonment with prison labor for four months.

Defendant

A does not pay the above fine.

피고인들은 2018. 4. 22. 01:00 경 울산 울주군 C에 있는 ‘D 주점 ’에서 직장 동료인 피해자 E(36 세) 과 술을 마시던 중, 업무 관련 문제로 말다툼을 하다가 피해자가 술상을 엎자 화가 나 피고인 A은 손으로 피해자의 얼굴 부위를 3회 때리고, 피고인 B은 발로 피해자의 배 부위를 1회 걷어찼다.

As a result, the Defendants jointly inflicted injury on the victim, such as the damage of the flag, the flag, the flag, and the flag in need of treatment for about two weeks.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ legal statement

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Each written diagnosis;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs of damaged parts;

1. Relevant Article of the Act and the choice of punishment for the crime;

(a) Defendant A: Article 2(2)3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act and Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act (elective selection of punishment)

B. Defendant B: Article 2(2)3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act and Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act (the choice of imprisonment with prison labor)

1. Defendant A who is detained in a workhouse: Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendant B: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (The following factors are considered in favor of the above Defendant among the grounds for sentencing)

1. Defendant B: Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendant A of the provisional payment order: The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is committed by the Defendants, at the main point of view, jointly with the victim, who is a workplace club, and inflicted an injury on the victim by assaulting him by hand and her. The nature and circumstances of the crime are not good, in light of the nature and degree of the injury inflicted on the victim as a result of the crime, the liability for the crime of this case is not easy, and in the case of Defendant B, even though there was a history of punishment for the same kind of violent crime several times, the crime of this case was committed against the Defendants.

However, the defendants are both aware of and against their mistakes, and the victims are only victims before prosecution.