However, from the date of the conclusion of the judgment, each of the above two years against the Defendants.

On February 20, 2018, at around 02:05, Defendants worked to drink to the E-ju store operated by the victim D (the 60-year-old age) in Jinju.

Defendant

A The victim suffered from the defect that “Nennnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

Defendant B continued to take the face of the victim who is living alone at the main point of the damage caused by the Defendants, and Defendant B took the face at a time, and Defendant A took the face of the victim at a time again.

As a result, the Defendants jointly inflicted injury on the victims, such as the 21-day treatment of approximately approximately 21 days, such as the bones, scoke, scoke, etc.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Examination protocol of police suspect regarding D;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. Photographss of damaged field and closures of images;

1. Application of each injury diagnosis certificate (D) statute;

1. Relevant Article 2(2)3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of imprisonment, and the choice of a sentence for the crime

1. Defendants subject to suspended execution: Reasons for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants within the scope of recommended sentences according to the sentencing guidelines: General injury (type 1) and mitigation area, February through October;

2. Determination of sentence: Imprisonment with prison labor for six months, one year of suspended sentence - the extent of damage is not less severe, and the defendants are allowed to have the same kind and different criminal records. The facts charged are recognized and the errors are divided, and the victim does not want the punishment in consultation with the victim.