He first decides to determine whether the jury was in fact unjust in its judgment. According to what they had concluded before the argument, Socrates and Crito both agree that one can voluntarily not do harm or knowingly commit unjust acts, and therefore that one cannot can never do harm in return, for then one would knowingly commit evil, thereby committing evil. unjust act. “You should never reciprocate harm, nor harm anyone, no matter what they have done to you. » (Plato, Crito 49c) Even if they determined that the decision was unjust against his previous claim, Socrates thinks that then the law would respond that he agreed to accept the jury's verdict, and therefore anything else would be contrary at his word, and therefore unjust. So, since this is true, they must conclude whether it will harm others if Socrates leaves, or whether it will harm others.