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

On December 12, 2013, the Defendants: (a) around 01:35, on the ground that the Victim F (56 years of age) sought to capture Defendant B’s microphone at a singing stage under the influence of alcohol; (b) Defendant B, by one hand, walked the part of the Victim F’s chest beyond the upper upper part of the Victim F’s chest into the upper part of the upper part; (c) Defendant A, and C, together with this, walked the victim F’s face and the parts above the body of the victim at two times; (d) the victim G (57 years of age); (e) the victim’s faces, the victim F’s driver’s walk at the victim F, and (e) the victim’s face at the victim’s h’s body, and (e) the victim’s h, the victim’s face at the victim’s h’s face, and (e) the victim’s h’s face at the victim’s h’s body and the victim’s face at the victim’s h h.

Accordingly, the Defendants jointly assaulted victim FF, G, and H.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ legal statement

1. Statement to the prosecution of I;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to police statements made to H, G, and F;

1. Article 2 (2) and (1) 1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act concerning the relevant criminal facts, each of the choice of punishment, and Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for detention in a workhouse;

1. The grounds for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, including the fact that the Defendants committed the instant crime even though they had a variety of identical criminal records, and the fact that the Defendants are highly likely to participate in the act of assault by combining multiple persons, are attempting to commit the crime that is disadvantageous to the Defendants.