Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3 million, and Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of KRW 300,000.

The above fines are imposed by the Defendants.

Punishment of the crime

1. When Defendant A, who had been aware of in the past society, took a bath by making a cell phone call with Defendant B and mobile phone, and took a half of the time, Defendant A, around 06:00 on September 14, 201, took a bath to Defendant B on the street on the parking lot of the Daejeon Dong-dong, Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-dong, Daejeon-dong, while taking a bath to Defendant B or Defendant B, and talking with him on the part of drinking.

As a result, Defendant A suffered injury to Defendant B, 2, such as the bones of the bones of 28 days of medical treatment.

2. Defendant B, on the same date, at the same time and at the same place as that of Defendant A, her hand at one time, she saw the right side of Defendant A to walk 3 and 4 times away from the left side, and plucked or broken up the left side.

Accordingly, Defendant B caused damage to Defendant A, in detail, to be treated for about 14 days, and to be damaged by the shoulder and the arms that require the treatment of about 14 days.

Summary of Evidence

[Judgment of the court below]

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. An injury diagnosis certificate (B);

1. The police statement on the defendant B (the second fact at the time)

1. Each legal statement of a witness A and D;

1. Suspect A, part of the body of the suspect;

1. An injury diagnosis certificate (A);

1. Application of the police interrogation protocol to Defendant A

1. The Defendants: Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts and the choice of punishment;

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

1. Defendants of the provisional payment order: Defendant B’s assertion as to Defendant B’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act argues that he was unilaterally assaulted by Defendant A and did not have committed an assault. However, Defendant B appears to have asserted that his act constitutes self-defense by submitting materials with the content that his act constitutes self-defense in the event that he was in action to avoid violence, and therefore, it constitutes self-defense. Therefore, it is based on the foregoing evidence (in particular, witness D’s legal statement).