Defendant

A and Defendant C shall be punished by a fine of 2,00,000 won, Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of 1,000,000 won, Defendant D shall be punished by a fine of 80.

Punishment of the crime

On October 2, 2015, the Defendants: (a) around 06:00, at the Namyang Savings Bank parking lot located in the Guan City, and (b) on the ground that the Defendant F (19 years of age) was changed to the Defendant A; (c) Defendant B, Defendant A, and Defendant C were to take the face and body of the victim F in a number of times due to drinking and growth; (d) Defendant B, Defendant B, Defendant A, and Defendant D were to take the face and body of the victim G (19 years of age) who is working in the victim F, due to drinking and growth.

Accordingly, the defendants jointly assaulted victims.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each police statement made to H, F, and G;

1. A written statement of I;

1. Side photographs of the victim's assault;

1. CCTV screen CDs at the scene of the crime;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to photograph CCTV images by capturing them;

1. Article 2(2) and Article 2(1)1 of the former Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Amended by Act No. 13718, Jan. 6, 2016); Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act concerning facts constituting an offense

1. Selection of each alternative fine for punishment;

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes (defendant B and A), the former part of Article 37 of each Criminal Act, Article 38(1)1, and Article 50 of each Criminal Act;

1. Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse (the Defendants)

1. The grounds for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act are as follows: (a) Defendant A, D, and C had a record of being subject to juvenile protective disposition by an act of violence, but they jointly committed each of the instant joint assault with Defendant B; and (b) there is a high possibility of criticism in the fact that the victims were not able to receive a letter from the victims except Defendant D, and that the damage was not recovered.

However, in light of the circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as the confession of all the crimes in this case and the violation of the law, Defendant B was the first offender, Defendant D agreed with the victim G, and Defendant D’s age, and other circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstance leading to the crime in this case, means and consequence, damage amount, and circumstances after the crime, etc., as stated in the records, the sentence is ordered.