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

The Defendants did not pay each of the above fines.

Punishment of the crime

On October 17, 2014, at around 22:30, the Defendants were subject to the control by the police officer, security guards I, assistant J, and assistant K of the Gangnam-gu Police Station, who was called out after receiving a report that the Defendants would have come to contact with the Domina in the Fudong, Daegu Northern-gu E.

Defendant

A tried to photograph a photographer in order to obtain a sway J, and read “Chewing typ,” followed by the Habow J, followed by the Habow J, and continuously sealed the ice I’s title; Defendant B sealed the ebbbow H into the elbow, pushed the ebow K into his arms, pushed the ebbbow K, pushed the ebs of slope J, pushed the ebs of slope J, pushed the knife, pushed the knife, pushed the knife, and pushed the knife, and Defendant C took the knife with the knife’s hand, ice, J 23 mife, and knife the knife with the knife’s hand.

As a result, the Defendants interfered with the legitimate performance of duties in relation to the handling of reported cases by Police Officers H, Inspector I, Assistant J, and Assistant K. At the same time, the Defendants jointly carried out salt and tensions that require approximately two weeks of treatment to the victim J (Nam and 39 years of age) as above.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each police statement made to J, K, H, and I;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a medical certificate;

1. Article 2 (2) and Article 2 (1) 3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act concerning the crime, Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of joint injury), and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

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

1. The fact that the degree of damage caused by the sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is relatively minor and that there are circumstances to be considered in light of the circumstances and circumstances, etc.