Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for one year and six months.

However, as to the Defendants for two years from the date of the final judgment of this case, the Defendants are above.

Punishment of the crime

1. At around 18:00 on October 26, 2012, Defendant A, at the F cafeteria operated by the Defendant in Gwangju Northern-gu, Defendant A, as a matter of the music music fee that had been going together with the victim B (the age of 52) on the part of the F cafeteria-gu, Gwangju Northern-gu, the Defendant heard the victim’s desire to “Wee the victim’s nesnesia” from the victim, followed the victim’s hair, “Ie the victim’s head,” and followed the victim’s head, one time by the dangerous spawn of the victim’s head, one time due to the dangerous spawn, which is a dangerous object, and led the victim’s right finger part to the victim’s knch 2 balance, spawn, and spawn.

Accordingly, the defendant carried dangerous objects and inflicted an injury on the victim.

2. Defendant B, at the same date and time as in the preceding paragraph, and at the same place as above, when the head was met by the victim A (n, 56 years of age) from the victim’s disease one time, he saw the head of the victim as a dangerous object, and caused the victim’s injury to the victim’s head and the brupted injury and the brupted injury in need of two weeks of treatment.

Accordingly, the defendant carried dangerous objects and inflicted an injury on the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. The legal statement of the defendant A (as of the second trial date);

1. Defendant B’s legal statement in the first trial record;

1. Entry of the police statement concerning G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to entries in each written diagnosis;

1. Defendants of relevant criminal facts: Articles 3 (1) and 2 (1) 3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants subject to discretionary mitigation: Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants of suspended execution: The Defendants in the grounds for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act both led to confession and reflect the crimes of this case, and do not want to be punished by mutual agreement, and the result of the above crimes is not much serious, and Defendant A did not have the same record, and Defendant B did not have the same record, which exceeds the fine by the same kind of force.