Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

The Defendants did not pay each of the above fines.

Punishment of the crime

On November 30, 2012, around 10:30 on November 30, 2012, the Defendants thought that the victim E (the age of 41) in the fourth floor of D D Building in Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul, would have 4 floors for the management of the building, and that the Defendants and F would have been damaged to the call architecture operated by the Defendants and F. Defendant B would have dried the victim’s breath and f, and Defendant A would have taken the victim’s breath from the elevator. Defendant A would have taken the victim’s breath and f into the elevator by taking the breath of the victim’s breath and f. There were several ages of age.

Accordingly, the Defendants jointly assaulted the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. The defendants' written statements in each protocol of suspect examination of each police officer against the defendants

1. Application of video Acts and subordinate statutes to crime scene photographs;

1. Relevant Article 2 (2) and (1) 1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act and Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act for the defendants who choose to commit a crime;

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

1. Determination as to the assertion by the Defendant B and the defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. Defendant B’s assertion is merely one time to ask the victim on the fourth floor of the instant building for the background leading up to the instant building. As such, the act does not violate social rules and is thus dismissed.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence revealed earlier, i.e., Defendant B, while looking at the developments leading to the fourth floor of the above building with the victim, duplicating in the elevator. It is difficult to view such an act as an act that does not violate the social rules that need considerable and complementary nature of the means and method and balance of the legal interests between the protected interests and the infringed interests.

Therefore, we cannot accept the defendant B and the defense counsel's assertion.