Of the judgment below, the part on the second crime of Defendant A and the part on Defendant B, C, and D shall be reversed.

A. As to the facts charged that the Defendant used the victim as a member of the organization by assaulting PP, which is a criminal organization, on the ground that the discipline of the organization was damaged among each of the facts charged in this case against the Defendant A of the public prosecutor (public prosecutor, the defendant A, and the defendant C). The above assault against the victim was committed on the ground that he responded to the organized code of conduct that “the above Defendant shall not obey the direction of the ship and run away at the end of the ship” at the time, and at the same time, he did assault the victim for the purpose of maintaining the existence and maintaining the inter-party marism, which is a criminal organization, and thus, it is difficult to conclude that it constitutes an active act of maintaining the existence of the inter-party marism. However, the court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, and by misapprehending the legal principles, it did not err by misapprehending the facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, as a member of the organization near the funeral hall of U. A., and thereby, found the Defendant as a member of the organization.

(3) The defendant's defense counsel withdraws his defense for mistake of facts on the date of the first trial of the court of the first instance, and at the second trial of the court of the first instance, the defendant's defense counsel held that the suspicion of the above crime is not acknowledged as above on the date of the second trial of the court of the first instance).

Notes....