Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine of one million won, and Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of three hundred thousand won.

The above fine is imposed against the Defendants.

Punishment of the crime

1. On November 2, 2016, around 15:45 on November 2, 2016, Defendant A expressed a bath in front of Seongdong-gu Seoul, Seongdong-gu, Seoul, for a neighboring victim B ( South, 76 years old) ( South, North, and 76 years old).

As the remainder of the thought, the breath caused the breath of the victim B by the breath, and the breath caused the injury to the victim B, which requires treatment for about 14 days.

2. Defendant B, at the time and place under the above paragraph (1) above, assaulted the victim’s bomb with double descendants during which the victim was punished for the same reasons as that under the above paragraph (1) and paragraph (1) above.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of witness B, E, and A;

1. The protocol concerning the interrogation of each police suspect against the Defendants

1. Statement made by the police for E;

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

1. Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act; Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act; Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act; Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act; Selection of a fine;

1. Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act on the confinement of the workhouse (defendants)

1. The portion not guilty under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. Of the facts charged against Defendant A, the Defendant, around November 2, 2016, 15:45, expressed a desire to the victim E in front of Seongdong-gu Seoul, Seongdong-gu, Seoul, and the neighbor B ( South, 76 years old) ( South, North, and 76 years old).

The rest of the thought was boomed by the breath of B with the breath, and the breath of B’s breath, and the breath of B’s wife E (e.g., the 72 years old) where the Defendant was flowed, and the victim was in need of treatment for about 21 days.

2. The Defendant’s assertion asserts that B was in line with the victim and was in line with the victim, and that he did not interfere with the victim.

3. In light of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court, it is reasonable to consider that the defendant suffered an injury by causing the injury to the victim only by the evidence submitted by the prosecutor.