Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for eight months, and for one year, each of the defendants B.

However, for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

피고인들은 2017. 4. 26. 03:00 경 대구 북구 D에 있는 ‘E’ 앞 도로에서, 피해자 F(21 세) 과 시비하다가 피해자가 오른 주먹으로 피고인 A의 얼굴을 1회 때리자, 피고인 A이 오른 주먹으로 피해자의 얼굴을 1회 때려 피해자를 바닥에 쓰러지게 하고, 이에 가세하여 피고인 B은 오른 주먹으로 정신을 잃은 채 바닥에 쓰러진 피해자의 얼굴을 1회 때리고, 오른발로 2회 걷어차고, 다시 오른 주먹으로 4회 때리고, 왼발로 1회 걷어차고, 계속하여 오른발로 1회 걷어차고, 양손으로 6회 때리고, 오른발로 1회 걷어찼다.

As a result, the Defendants jointly inflicted injury on the victim, such as other luminous boness and felinites that require approximately four weeks of medical treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. Each injury diagnosis letter;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the F standing photographs, CCTV CDs, and CCTV images-cape photographs;

1. The Defendants: Article 2(2)3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act, and Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of imprisonment for a crime

1. Defendant A who is subject to suspended execution: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (The conditions favorable to the reasons for sentencing specified below);

1. Defendant A of a community service order: Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. In cases where the victim is fully responsible for the occurrence of a crime or the expansion of damage to the basic area (from April to one year and six months) (special mitigation (special mitigation)) of type 1 (the scope of recommending punishment) general injury to the victim according to the sentencing guidelines / In cases where the victim is also responsible for the occurrence of a crime or the expansion of damage, serious injury (the types of 1 and 4);

2. Circumstances unfavorable to the decision of sentence: The degree of injury inflicted by the Defendants is very serious. Nevertheless, the Defendants’ failure to recover damage and thereby the Defendants wanted to punish the Defendants. In particular, Defendant B already lost the mind and was in an impossible state of resistance.