Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000,000 and by a fine of KRW 1 million.

The above fines are imposed by the Defendants.

Punishment of the crime

1. At around December 29, 2013, Defendant B: (a) around 13:20 on December 29, 2013, the Defendant considered that the mother of the Defendant, who was working in the corridor located in the Seocho-gu Seoul Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Council, was in excess of its surrounding area.

The Defendant: (a) caused a victim A (50 years of age) who is opposed to the church problem, to be able to catch his part of his own timber that goes beyond the limits of reporting it; and (b) caused an injury to the victim, by leading the victim into a flabb for about 14 days, which requires medical treatment.

2. The Defendant, at the time and place specified in paragraph (1), led the victim B(36 years of age) to breath for the same reasons as that of paragraph (1) and inflicted bodily injury on the victim, such as spawn and spawn, which require treatment for about two weeks.

Summary of Evidence

[Defendant B]

1. Defendant B’s partial statement

1. Partial statement of the witness A;

1. A written diagnosis of injury (53 pages of investigation records);

1. The suspect's damage photographs, on-site CDs, and video CDs (B) at the scene of the assault (Defendant A);

1. The defendant A's partial statement

1. The suspect interrogation protocol of the police as to B;

1. B written statements;

1. A written diagnosis of injury (72 pages of investigation records);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to suspect's damage photographs, dynamics at the scene of violence (B);

1. Relevant provisions concerning facts constituting an offense and the Defendants who choose punishment: Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants to be detained in a workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act;

1. The Defendants of the provisional payment order: Determination on the defense counsel’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The defendant A's defense counsel asserts that the act of the defendant A constitutes legitimate self-defense, and the defendant B's defense counsel asserts that the act of the defendant B constitutes excessive self-defense or excessive defense.

2. Determination

A. To recognize self-defense as stipulated in Article 21(1) of the Criminal Act, there should be “the current unfair infringement” on one’s own or another’s legal interests, and such infringement.