Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 300,00, and by a fine of KRW 1,500,000, respectively.

The above fine is imposed against the Defendants.

Punishment of the crime

1. Defendant A (Bodily Injury) around 14:00 on June 6, 2012, Defendant A: (a) placed the chest part of the victim B (58 years old, South) in front of the new construction work site in Ansan-si E at the same time; (b) placed the victim F and G, the parent of the Defendant, who was next to the Defendant, in front of the new construction site in Ansan-si, on one occasion; and (c) had the victim go beyond the upper half of the

As a result, the defendant A, in collaboration with F, had two government units (duals) in need of 14 days of treatment, and failed to examine the victim B.

2. Defendant B (Assault, Injury) assaulted the chest part of the victim A (the 38 years old, South) on the same ground as the above paragraph 1, and the victim F (the 68 years old, South) sold the ice ice fice fice fice fice fice franchis on the left side of the victim F (the 68 years old, South) to the victim F.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statements made by witnesses B, H, A, and F in the third protocol of trial;

1. Legal statement of a witness I;

1. Some police interrogation protocol against the Defendants and F

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of each injury diagnosis letter;

1. Article 2 (2) and (1) 3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of joint injury, the selection of fines): Defendant B: Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of violence, the selection of fines), Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of injury and the selection of fines);

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

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

1. The defendant A and his defense counsel's assertion on the claim of the defendant A and the defense counsel under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act asserts that since the defendant A and the defense counsel caused the defendant B to be pushed down with B to protect F by putting the defendant F, his father, they constitute self-defense or legitimate act, it constitutes a legitimate act.

In full view of the above evidence, Defendant A was sealed on the ground that Defendant B affixed a photograph at the construction site. During this process, Defendants, F, and G were also sealed.