Defendants are not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the Defendants is publicly announced.

1. On July 9, 2016, the Defendants, at the main point of the “J” located in the Geum-gu, Busan, on the part of July 9, 2016, and Defendant A and B, on the part of Defendant C, on the part of Defendant C, and on the part of Defendant C, the Defendant D, on the part of her husband, had drinking each other as a kind of drinking with the victim K (34 years) who is the husband.

Around that time, the victim started to scule the sculbling by drinking alcohol, assaulting the Defendants at the above main point, and sculing.

At around 03:12 on the same day, the Defendants conspired to suppress the victim's above riot, Defendant A could not take place by dividing the part on the right side of the victim's body by both arms and body weight. Defendant B could not take place by dividing the part on the left side of the victim's body in the same way. Defendant C could not take place by dividing the part on the victim's body's body's body's body's part on the left side in the same way. Defendant D assaulted to prevent the victim from putting the victim's bridge on the left side in the same way, and caused the death of the victim due to this.

2. Defendants and defense counsel's assertion

A. The Defendants A, B, and C’s act constitutes legitimate defense and thus, the illegality is excluded.

However, even if not, in light of the circumstances of the case, the excessive defense under Article 21, Article 21, Article 21, Paragraph 2 and 3 of the Criminal Code is the excessive defense.

② There was no likelihood of death for the Defendants.

B. Defendant D: (a) The Defendant was merely unable to attach the left-hand bridge of the victim with the intent to file a petition against the victim, who is the husband, and did not have the intention of assault.

(2) The defendant was unlikely to have died.

3. Determination

A. The following facts are acknowledged according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court.

1) While the victim, the defendant D, and the public prosecution were under drinking alcohol together, the defendant D was in the victim's house, but the victim did not comply with the request, and the defendant D under the influence of alcohol was under the influence of alcohol.