Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.

The Defendants did not pay each of the above fines.

Punishment of the crime

1. Defendant B, on May 6, 2016, expressed three-minutes of alcohol in dry field owned by the victim A located near the Northwest-gun G on May 13:50, 2016, on the ground that the victim did not engage in ordinary personnel affairs, Defendant B, who committed the assault by Defendant B, has drank alcohol.

"At the end, the second part of the victim's back head was assaulted at one time by the second part of the victim."

2. Defendant A’s bodily injury caused by assault was assaulted by the victim B, as set forth in paragraph (1) of this Article, and the victim’s buckbucks around each side of the victim’s bridge bucks, and the victim who lost balance was in excess of the victim, and the victim was faced with approximately six weeks of the head back of the cement road, and the victim was faced with more than two main parts of the cement road, and the victim was faced with an interest-oriented traumad cerebral cerebrs that are in need of treatment for about six weeks.

Summary of Evidence

1. Part of the Defendants’ legal statements

1. The legal statements of the witness B and A in part;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the injury diagnosis certificate;

1. Relevant Article of the Act and the choice of punishment for the crime;

A. Defendant B’s Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act (a) (a point of assault and a fine)

B. Articles 262 and 260(1) of the Criminal Act of Defendant A (the point of causing violence and injury, and the choice of fines)

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act for the attraction of a workhouse;

1. Determination on the assertion by the Defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of each of the Criminal Procedure Act in the provisional payment order

1. Defendant A asserts that even though he took the victim B’s bridge one time in both hands, the victim did not follow the bridge, and even thereafter, the victim did flicken and passive resistance to the Defendant, and during the process of flicking, the victim’s own flicked himself, who lost balance, did not have any causal relation between the result of assault and bodily injury, and constitutes a justifiable act that does not go against social norms.

The victim is the defendant and the trial cost. The defendant's body will come up with his own body.