Defendants shall be punished by a fine of one million won.

The Defendants did not pay each of the above fines.

Punishment of the crime

1. On April 7, 2016, Defendant A was sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year by imprisonment with labor for a special injury at the Incheon District Court, and the judgment became final and conclusive on July 7, 2016.

On June 5, 2016, the Defendant: (a) opened a construction site located in Leecheon-siJ on June 10, 2016, and ordered the victim (the victim (the victim) B (the victim) (the victim) who is a leader of the steel saton (the victim) around the said site to work in another place; and (b) opened the victim's left side by asking the victim's bat; and (c) laid down the victim's bat; and (d) opened the victim's b1-day bat, the victim's b1-day cat around the

2. Defendant B, at the time, at the time, at the place specified in the above paragraph (1) and in response to the assault by the victim A (Defendant A) as stated in the above paragraph (1), he saw the victim’s flaps and flaps, and assaulted the victim, such as flapsing the victim’s head, and flapsing the victim’s head.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement in each protocol of examination of witness K, L and M;

1. The witness B’s legal statement (as to the defendant A)

1. A written diagnosis of injury to B;

1. Statement with respect to B;

1. Written reply to inquiries, such as criminal history (A);

1. Copies, etc. of each written judgment;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes for inquiry;

1. Defendant A of the relevant Article of the Criminal Act: Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act; Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act; Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act; Selection of fines;

1. Defendant A who handles concurrent crimes: After Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 39 (1);

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

1. Defendants of the Provisional Payment Order: Defendant A’s assertion on Defendant A’s assertion of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is that the act of attack against Defendant B constitutes a legitimate defense or legitimate act to escape from the hedging of Defendant B, but the price act committed during a series of mutual conflict constitutes an act of violence between the other parties, and thus, Defendant’s assertion cannot be accepted.

As a matter of the payment of reasonable wage for sentencing, the issue of mutual advice began, and the exercise of tangible force.