A Imprisonment with prison labor for one year, and for four months, for each of the defendants B.

Litigation costs shall be borne by Defendant A.

1. On November 27, 2017, at the E store operated by the victim B (38) in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, Seoul-do, Defendant A, on the ground that the mobile phone that had been entrusted with repair had not been properly repaired, Defendant A and the victim had been in dispute with the victim on the ground that the mobile phone that had been previously repaired was not properly repaired, Defendant A and the victim sustained the victim’s shoulder part once with his/her hand, with his/her hand, and caused the victim’s injury on the part of his/her shoulder and flab, which requires medical treatment for about 21 days.

2. Defendant B, at the time, at the time, at the place specified in the above paragraph (1) as mentioned above, committed an injury to the victim, such as a closed frame 21 days in need of treatment, while the victim’s cream dispute with the victim A (32 tax). Defendant B, by hand, was pushed down the part of the victim’s breath, dumbing the breath, dumbing the breath, and dumbing the breath of the b1st head.

Summary of Evidence

1. Part of Defendant A’s legal statement

1. Defendant B’s legal statement

1. Legal statement of the witness B;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of suspect of the defendant A;

1. Results of inquiries into respective facts about F dental services and the National Health Insurance Corporation;

1. Each injury diagnosis letter;

1. Each photograph (CCTV);

1. Determination as to the assertion by the Defendant A and the defense counsel for one DNA

1. Although Defendant A (hereinafter, hereinafter, hereinafter, hereinafter referred to as “Defendant” in this judgment item) was a fact that Defendant B (hereinafter, hereinafter referred to as “B” in this judgment item) carried out by hand in order to escape from or defend it from the violence of Defendant B (hereinafter, hereinafter referred to as “B”), it did not constitute “B” price, and there was no fact that Defendant’s act sustained injury as indicated in its reasoning.

2. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence of the judgment, it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant has sold B with the intention of injury, thereby causing the injury as set forth in the judgment B, and that the defendant's act constitutes a legitimate defense.

Defendant

We do not accept the assertion of counsel.

(1) Videos recorded in a closed circuit shall be stored in a wning box B.