1. Defendant A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1.5 million, and Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

2. Defendants each of the above facts.

Punishment of the crime

1. On October 31, 2017, Defendant A: (a) carried out public relations activities by dividing the leaflets of his “D” shop in front of his/her shop in Busan Jung-gu Busan Central Hospital; (b) Defendant A called “B (Y, 37 years of age”; (c)” referred to as “I, in this context, as “I, I do not see”; and (d) three times times times the part of the victim’s ship by drinking; (b) was spawd with the head by hand; and (c) was injured by the victim, such as the right hand seat, spawn, spawn, and spawn for a two-time period period of medical treatment.

2. Defendant B set up against the victim A (at the age of 57) at the above date, time, and at the above place, Defendant B abused the victim’s chest part by hand at six times, pushed down the victim’s chest part, pushed down the clothes, and assaulted the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant A’s legal statement

2. Part of each protocol concerning the interrogation of suspect against the Defendants

3. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes reporting police investigations;

1. Relevant Article of the Act and the choice of punishment for the crime;

(a) Defendant A: Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act (Selection of a punishment penalty);

B. Defendant B: Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act (Optional to a punishment)

2. Determination as to the assertion by the Defendant B and the defense counsel under Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act, each of which is confined in a workhouse

1. The summary of the argument is that Defendant B only made a passive resistance to defend himself against the assault of Defendant A, and there was no assault against Defendant A like the facts constituting the crime in the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The degree of the formation of a conviction in a criminal trial must be such that there is no reasonable doubt, but to the extent that it does not require that all possible doubts be excluded, and rejection by causing a suspicion that there is no reasonable ground for recognizing probative value is beyond the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence. The reasonable doubt here includes any question and belief.