2. It is recognized that the Defendants were led to the judgment of the court when they led to the confession of the crime of this case, and that there is no record of criminal punishment or criminal punishment heavier than that of suspended execution.

However, the crime of this case was committed by Defendant B, a street cleaners, on the part of the victim, and the defendants were in a situation with the victim D and F, and they jointly inflicted each injury on the victims. The nature of the crime is not good in light of the method and contents of the crime. The defendants asserted that the investigative agency was only unilaterally from the victims to the court of the court below, and that it was not good in the circumstances after the crime of this case was committed. The court below seems to have determined each punishment by reducing the fine for each summary order (one million won each), taking into account the circumstances favorable to the above defendants, and there was no special circumstance or change of circumstances that may be newly considered after the sentence of the court below, and considering all the sentencing conditions in the argument of this case, such as the defendants' age, career, character and behavior, environment, motive, method and method of the crime of this case, the method and result of the crime, etc.

Therefore, each of the above arguments by the Defendants cannot be accepted.

3. As such, the Defendants’ appeal is without merit. Thus, all of the appeals are dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

However, pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure, three lines of the judgment of the court below shall be six.