A. Although there was a fact that the Defendants were in the instant field of mistake of facts together with E and F, the Defendants did not participate in the fact that they damaged recreation equipment and inflicted bodily injury on the victims, and that the Defendants did not participate in it, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. Unless otherwise, the lower court’s sentencing (six months of imprisonment) is too unlimited and unfair.

Judgment

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, i.e., at the court of the court below, K at the site: (a) at the court of the court below, five persons including the defendants appear at the site; (b) at the court of the court below, five persons, including the defendants, ordered the game machine, damaged the game machine; and (c) at the court of the court below, five persons, including the defendants, were entered in the game room at the time of the case; and (d) at the investigation agency and the court of the court below, five persons, including the defendants at the time of the case, damaged the game machine, etc.; and (e) one person, at the entrance of the court of the case, reported the game room at the bar, and stated that the rest of the person, with whom the defendants met, had a dangerous article jointly with E and F, destroyed the game machine owned by the victim, and caused injury to the victim H and the court of the case.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

B. As to the assertion of unfair sentencing, the Defendants did not want to punish the Defendants by mutual consent with the victims, and the degree of their participation appears to be minor compared to E and F, etc., 4 times including that the Defendants were subject to punishment once for the same kind of crime.