1. Defendant A shall be punished by a fine of 300,000 won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendants were the believers of the “F church” in Seocho-gu Seoul, Seoul, and the victims G (54) reported the assembly to the effect that the act of misconduct of H, which is a pastor of the above church, would be an issue of the above church, but did not let the victims attract the victims from the distribution of the above church on the ground that the victims participated in the above church worship.

Accordingly, on May 10, 2015, the Defendants demanded that “the person who has reported an assembly shall not be allowed to see that the person who has reported an assembly is different” to the victim, and that the victim would refuse to do so and continue to attend a worship.”

The defect, Defendant B, and C attached both arms of the victim, and Defendant A pushed the victim in the aftermath of the victim, and led the victim to the first floor of the above church through stairs from the above towing distribution to the stairs.

Accordingly, the Defendants jointly assaulted the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Part of the protocol concerning the interrogation of suspects against the Defendants (including the whole part of the G department)

1. Application of the Act and subordinate statutes to investigation reports and video recorded matters CDs;

1. The Defendants: 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 (elective selection of punishment)

1. Defendants to be detained in the workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act (one hundred thousand won per day);

1. Defendant B and C of suspended sentence: Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act (the punishment to be suspended: Each fine of 700,000 won, and the following sentencing shall be considered as favorable to the statements in the sentencing);

1. Defendant A of the provisional payment order: The Defendants and the defense counsel asserted the assertion of justifiable acts under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act. The Defendants’ act asserted that the Defendants’ act constitutes a justifiable act that does not go against the social rules and thus, constitutes a justifiable act that does not go against the socially accepted rules.

However, the acts of inducing the victims who attended the worship by force as stated in its reasoning are legitimate.