Defendant

A A shall be punished by a fine of 2 million won, and Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of 1.5 million won.

The above fine is imposed against the Defendants.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A is a person who operates G carpets on the second floor of F building, and Defendant B is a manager of F building management.

1. On October 19, 2015, the Defendant determined that the victim B was removed without permission from the third floor living support center office of the building F of Daegu-dong-gu, Daegu-gu, Seoul-gu, the Defendant: (a) reported that the victim B was laid on the floor of the signboard; and (b) caused injury to the victim B, such as a spathal mouth, an open eye, etc. around the 21st day of the treatment date, such as assaulting the face of B several times and taking face in drinking.

2. Defendant B, at the time and place described in the above paragraph 1, assaulted A’s face by drinking in response to the assault by the victim A, and inflicted an injury on A, such as 28 days during the treatment period, damage to the integrity of oral mouths, and flachiing.

Summary of Evidence

[Defendant A]

1. Part of the defendant's legal statements;

1. Legal statement of the witness B;

1. Statement made by the witness H in the third public trial records;

1. A photographic and diagnosis report (B) of an injury;

1. Part of the defendant's legal statements;

1. A legal statement of a witness;

1. Statement made by the witness H in the third public trial records;

1. In light of the following, the Defendants’ act in the judgment is deemed to have the nature of an attack beyond the minimum degree of defense that can be recognized as legitimate defense, and it is merely a passive defense act that does not violate social rules. Although the Defendants asserted that it constitutes a legitimate defense or legitimate act as an act to avoid assault by the other party, the Defendants’ act in the judgment is deemed to have the nature of the attack beyond the minimum degree of defense that can be recognized as legitimate defense, and it is not merely a passive defense act that does not violate social rules.

As such, the application of the law cannot be seen as a legitimate defense or a legitimate act

1. Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act provides that the pertinent provision of the Criminal Act and the choice of punishment for the crime (the choice of penalty) shall be applied.