However, each of the above defendants is against the defendants for one year from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

The defendants are between the workplace rent of the engineering company located in Daegu Suwon-gu, and the victim E (16 tax) and F (16 tax) are between the parties.

From around 03:00 on March 10, 2017, Defendants jointly walked in front of the H convenience store located in Daegu Suwon-gu G and about 03:0, on the ground that the victim F was damaged, Defendants A and the victim F.: ① Defendant A blue the face and clothes of the victim F due to blusium and blusium; ② Defendant B brue the face of the victim E by her hand and her hand; ② Defendant B brue the face of the victim E and F; ③ the Defendants brue the face of the victim E by her own hair and drinking; ④ Defendant A brue damaged the victim’s face with drinking convenience points; ⑤ Defendants brue out of H convenience points; and ⑤ Defendants brue the victim’s face with outside of the H convenience point; and brue and brue the victim’s face with outside of the victim’s eye and other brut surgery necessary for treatment; and brue treatment and treatment of the victim’s face.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Statement of each police suspect interrogation protocol against the Defendants and E

1. Statement made to F in the police statement protocol;

1. Each description of each injury diagnosis certificate;

1. Application of the video Acts and subordinate statutes to the Defendants and victims’ photographs

1. The Defendants: Article 2 (2) 3 and Article 257 (1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc.

1. Defendants who are subject to aggravated concurrent crimes: the former part of Article 37 and Articles 38(1)2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. The defendants of suspended sentence: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da1548, Apr. 2, 2006).