A. Defendant B1) misunderstanding of facts, the Defendant reported the victim’s attempt to assault E by force, and the victim suffered bodily injury due to his own head under the influence of alcohol, and even though the Defendant did not have inflicted bodily injury by assaulting the victim, the lower court which convicted the Defendant of an unfair sentencing judgment erred by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment. 2) The sentence of imprisonment (six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, two years of social service, and 120 hours) sentenced by the lower court of unfair sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor (one year of imprisonment) sentenced by the court below (with respect to Defendant C) is too unhued and unfair.

2. Judgment on Defendant B’s assertion of mistake of facts

A. The judgment of the court below is based on the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, i.e., (i) A was consistently stated from the investigation agency to the court of the court below that “A was punished by the male and female franchising from E to the court of the court of the court below,” and (ii) CCTV image (S assistant video data) the face part was not taken on the screen (which seems not to have been taken on the screen), but at the time of the above crime, C did not take the face as a mobile phone by reporting that the male franchising of A took the front franchising, and franchising this male franchising over the front franchis, and that the Defendant was taken with the front franchising of the Defendant B and E, which considerably exceeded the upper franchis, and that the Defendant was merely a police officer’s franchising and franchising the front franchis.”