In the event that the Defendants did not pay the above fine, each of them is 100.

[Criminal Power] Defendant B was sentenced to six months of imprisonment by the Daegu District Court on September 2, 2016, and the judgment became final and conclusive on September 10, 2016.

【Criminal Facts】

Defendant

A is a person who manages street points in the E Park F in Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, and Defendant B is a person who spaws a street store using a driver truck.

1. On April 24, 2016, around 06:20 on the street before the Epark, Defendant A: (a) parked a horse truck before the Epark, and (b) told the defective victim to move the horse truck to another place; and (c) the victim refused to move the horse truck to a different place.

When the defendant takes a bath to the victim, and the victim's face and shoulder are taken over by his hand, the defendant inflicted an injury on the victim, such as dump, tensions, etc. in need of medical treatment for about two weeks.

2. Defendant B, at the time and place specified in paragraph (1) as seen above, when taking a part of the victim’s face with the victim A (year 71) as drinking, the Defendant brought about approximately two weeks of treatment to the victim, such as the left-hand son-buck in the face of the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. G statements;

1. A medical certificate;

1. Each photograph;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning criminal records and investigation reports (Attachment to judgment, etc.);

1. Relevant Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act and the Defendants’ choice of punishment regarding criminal facts: Determination of fines

1. Defendant B who handles concurrent crimes: The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants in custody in the workhouse are disadvantageous to the Defendants on the grounds of sentencing under Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act.

However, each fine shall be selected in consideration of the fact that the defendants are against the law, that both parties have agreed smoothly, and that the defendant B should take into account the equality in the case of judgment concurrently with the crime of damage to public goods in the judgment.