A. Defendant A1) misunderstanding of facts did not have inflicted an injury on the victim B by assaulting the victim B as stated in the facts charged in this case. Nevertheless, the court below convicted the Defendant, which erred by misunderstanding the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. 2) The sentence (2.5 million won) sentenced by the court below of unfair sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles did not cause an injury by assaulting a victim A as stated in the facts charged in the instant case, and physical force that the Defendant inflicted on the victim A constitutes self-defense to escape from the victim’s assault. Nevertheless, the lower court convicted the Defendant, thereby misapprehending the facts or misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. 2) In so doing, the sentence (two million won of fine) imposed by the lower court on the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The defendants and the defense counsel of the court below asserted the above mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles in the court below. The court below rejected the above arguments and found the defendants guilty of all the facts charged of this case in light of the circumstances stated in its judgment.

Examining the reasoning of the judgment below which duly adopted and examined by the court below in a close comparison with the records of this case, the court below is just in holding that the Defendants committed violence and injury to each other as stated in the judgment below, and that Defendant B’s act was not self-defense.

We cannot accept the defendants' assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles.

B. The Defendants denied the Defendants’ criminal act up to the trial of the lower court, and the Defendants lack the attitude of reflectivity.