The Defendants did not pay each of the above fines.

1. On June 3, 2016, the Defendants of the assaulted Defendants: (a) committed meals in the “F” restaurant where the Defendants were employed by the victim E, who was an employee of the victim, who was an employee of the victim, and was in a large string of music with a cellular phone, and (b) led the victim the victim to wear back the clothes of the victim, and (c) Defendant A led the victim to wear back the clothes of the victim, i.e., “h., g., g., g., h.,” and n.e., h., h. to the victim.

Bara, “Ieman,” and brue the part of the victim’s chest by hand.

Accordingly, the Defendants conspired to assault the victim.

2. The injured Defendants were at the time and place indicated in the preceding paragraph, and the victim G, the head of the above restaurant, was found to have a defect in preventing the assault of the Defendants. At the same time, the Defendants: the victim’s arms are towed; the victim’s shoulders and necks are pushed down to the entrance; the Defendant A was unable to drive the victim’s shoulders and necks by saving the victim’s shoulders; Defendant B her head was frighted by the victim’s hand; Defendant B was kneeked by the victim’s head; and knee knee knee kne.

As a result, the Defendants conspiredd with the victim about about 14 days in order to inflict an injury on the base of salt, etc. in need of treatment.

3. The Defendants: (a) assaulted the store G and employees E in the above restaurant at the time and place specified in paragraph 1; and (b) led many customers, who had taught within the above restaurant, did not provide meals; and (c) allowed them to return to the restaurant; and (d) enter the above restaurant.

Accordingly, the defendants interfered with the legitimate restaurant business of the victim G and the victim E by force over about one hour.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each police statement protocol with respect to G and E;

1. A written diagnosis of injury;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigative reports (p.m. telephone conversations);

1. Defendants of the pertinent legal provisions concerning criminal facts: Articles 260(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act (Assaults).