Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

On February 22, 2016, at around 06:00, the Defendants avoided tobacco from the victim F (17 tax) on the front of the road located in Gumi-si, Gumi-si on the ground that: (a) Defendant A was flicking the flat of the victim; and (b) Defendant B was flicking the victim’s head flat; and (c) Defendant B was flicking the victim on the floor.

Accordingly, the Defendants jointly assaulted the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Part of the Defendants’ legal statements

1. Each legal statement of witness F and G;

1. The Defendants and their defense counsel denied the crime by putting the victim up while Defendant A was put up in line with vadi, which goes beyond the center of vadi, and the Defendants did not jointly commit the crime.

However, the above assertion by the Defendants and the defense counsel is not accepted, since the facts charged in the judgment are recognized in full view of the following circumstances admitted by each evidence.

① The injured party consistently stated that Defendant A she dump his head with his flaps while making flaps with the Defendants, and Defendant B her head with his flaps.

② A witness G was present at the scene at the time of the instant case, and the Defendants appeared to have observed the fact beyond the victim.

Comparedly made statements.

Witness

Although the victim of G is not somewhat consistent in the part concerning the number of statements submitted by the victim, the disagreement in the above statement does not reach the degree of denying the credibility of the witness G's statement.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 2 (2) 1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act concerning the crime, Article 2 of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc., Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act, and the selection of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act for the attraction of a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act for the provisional payment order is that Defendant A was punished for the same kind of crime or has no record of punishment exceeding the fine, and Defendant B was the first offender.