Defendant

A A shall be punished by a fine of 2.5 million won, and Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of 700,000 won.

The above fines are imposed by the Defendants.

Punishment of the crime

1. Defendant A around June 28, 2016, around 13:30, and around 13:30, the Defendant inflicted an injury on the part of the victim and the part of the left-hand side of the internal wall bast, which requires medical treatment for about 28 days, on the ground that, while drinking together with the victim’s house No. 107 Dong 1906, and with the victim’s day together, the victim was under drinking together, the victim’s words “the same year as the victim’s day of illness”, the victim was sleeped, and the victim was sleeped by his hand.

2. Defendant B expressed the victim’s desire to “the same age of illness” at the date, time, and place described in paragraph (1), and thereby, the victim expressed the victim’s face, frightened the victim’s head, walking the victim’s head head, walking the bridge by hand, walking the victim’s head head, walking the bridge, and fright the victim’s face at around two weeks.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant B’s legal statement

1. Some police interrogation protocol against the Defendants

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Each injury diagnosis letter;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes governing injury B;

1. The Defendants: Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts and the choice of punishment;

1. Defendants to be detained in a workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants of the provisional payment order: Defendant A and the defense counsel’s assertion regarding Defendant A and the defense counsel’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act; the above Defendant continued to grow up against the above Defendant who had been on the back of the Defendant’s head with the Defendant’s head debt and continued to do so; thus, the Defendant’s act of blocking the victim’s assault and entering in the facts charged in order to escape from the Defendant’s act of self-defense or legitimate act is asserted to the effect that illegality is excluded.

However, according to the evidence of the judgment, the above defendant was assaulted by the victim.