A shall be punished by a fine for negligence of KRW 2,000,000, and by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.

The above fine is imposed against the Defendants.

1. On September 17, 2016, at around 22:15, Defendant A: (a) expressed that the taxi driver was punished by the victim B (the 64 years of age) and Si expenses on the front of the Da road located in Busan Jung-gu, Busan, as the problem of the taxi driver’s vehicle; (b) the head took one time the part of the victim’s entrance fee; and (c) the victim’s face was taken by drinking at one time; and (d) when the victim’s face was taken by drinking, the victim was able to know the number of days of treatment; and (d) the two was sicked.

2. Defendant B

A. On the ground that the victim A(the age of 56) was caught at a time and place under Paragraph 1, the injured Defendant her boomed the victim’s face while drinking the victim’s booming the victim’s face, and her boomed the victim’s body once, resulting in the victim’s injury, such as snow booming, in which the number of treatment days cannot be known to the victim, by walking the victim’s body once.

B. The Defendant destroyed and damaged the property at the time and place of Paragraph 1, and at the same time and place, 7 mobile phones 1 at the galth of Samsung galth of the market value owned by the victim that was damaged by the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Statement of the police statement of E;

1. Photographs;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each investigation report (No. 6 and 10 No. 10)

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

A. Defendant A: Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act; selection of fines

B. Defendant B: Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of injury), Article 366 of the Criminal Act (the point of causing damage to property), and the choice of each fine

1. Defendant B from among concurrent crimes: former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act (Aggravation of concurrent crimes with the punishment heavier than that prescribed for the concurrent crimes);

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

1. Defendants of the provisional payment order: The Defendants committed each of the crimes of this case in a contingent manner in the course of committing violent crimes with the reason of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, although they had a record of criminal punishment several times due to violent crimes with the reason of sentencing.