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

The Defendants did not pay the above fines.

Punishment of the crime

At around July 7, 2013, the Defendants, in collaboration with D, heard “G” points operated by the Victim F (F) in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, Seoul-do, around 21:20 on July 7, 2013. Defendant A heard the horses that he would bring the victim’s money from H, one of his own land in the same place, and the victim himself saw “this efics and 3.5 million won to the 3.5 million won.” The Defendant, in combination with D, she took the victim’s face, she took the victim’s head, knife the victim’s head, knife the victim’s head, knife the victim’s head, knife the victim’s head, knife the victim’s head, knife the victim’s body, knife the victim’s body, knife the victim’s injury, and knife the victim’s k for two days.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of the Defendants (as of the third trial date)

1. A protocol concerning the examination of each police suspect against F or D;

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

1. Article 2 (2) and (1) 3 of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc., and Article 2 (1) of the same Act concerning facts constituting an offense, and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act;

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

1. The dismissal part of the prosecution under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, each of the provisional payment orders

1. Around July 21, 2013, at around 21:55, Defendant B expressed the victim F’s desire to “Crosta.” on the ground that he/she was arrested as a flagrant offender by the following act: (a) at the I police box located in Ulsan-gu, U.S., U.S., as a flagrant offender on the ground that he/she was involved in the act of recording the criminal facts during his/her arrest as a flagrant offender; and (b) he/she expressed the victim F’s intent to “Crosta.” (a) on the ground that he/she was bad.

2. We examine the judgment. This part of the facts charged is a crime falling under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the victim's express intent under Article 260(3) of the Criminal Act. The records are examined.