1. Defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment for five months.

However, the above sentence shall be executed for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A and Defendant B are working, and the victim C(21) is a person who has passed a path.

Defendant

A around 00:00 on September 10, 2017, the victim B, who was in the process of telephone conversations on the party floor located in Gyeyang-gu D without any justifiable reason, she coming from the time when she talks with the victim, including “slick, string, narrow, ra, and shot,” and her response to “the victim,” she was called “the victim,” and her response to this, she was sent to the victim by leaving the victim into the parking lot of the building in Gyeyang-gu, Gyeyang-gu, Yangyang-gu, Yangyang-gu, Yangyang-gu, the victim B, who was in the process of contact with Defendant D, continued to suffer from the victim’s hair, she had his hair, she had the victim’s hair at the time, she had the victim’s hair, she had the victim’s hair, she had the victim’s hair and other necessary her face for treatment, such as the victim’s mouth treatment, and continued to have the victim’s hair and other necessary her face for treatment.

As a result, the Defendants jointly inflicted injury on the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant A’s legal statement

1. The defendant B's partial statement

1. C Witness’s testimony;

1. C’s statement of witness - One answer-type 1;

1. A damaged photograph;

1. Each written diagnosis;

1. Egressing the fact of damage and a diagnostic certificate;

1. Hospital receipt;

1. The result of viewing and reproducing the CD of video recording (CCTV video) No. 7 of this Court’s No. 16 at a net time [Defendant B and the defense counsel asserted that Defendant B only engaged in the crime and that there was no fact that Defendant B was involved in the crime. However, the victim’s investigative agency’s statement that is consistent and reliable from the victim’s investigative agency to this court (the victim was not aware of the previous Defendants of this case) is another situation at the time.