Criminal facts

B. In relation to the claim, there was no interference with the victim's business due to the defendant's act, and there was no intention to interfere with the defendant's business.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found all criminal facts guilty is erroneous by misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles that affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. According to evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below regarding the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint injury), in particular, according to the victim E's investigation agency and the statement in the court below, the victim has made a concrete and consistent statement about the circumstance of the occurrence of the case, the statements and actions of the defendant before and after the case, the response of the victim, the developments leading up to the occurrence of the case, etc., and the circumstances leading up to the entry into the D site of this case. There are no special

According to the statement of the victim, as stated in the facts of the crime in the judgment below, the defendant sufficiently recognizes the facts of assaulting the victim.

Article 2(2) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act requires that there exists so-called so-called accomplice relationship between the number of persons who jointly commit the crime of injury or assault. Moreover, the case where several persons are aware of another person’s crime in the same opportunity at the same place and commit the crime by using it (see Supreme Court Decision 2013Do4430, Nov. 28, 2013, etc.). The Defendant and D have caused the instant crime; the background leading up to the instant crime; the Defendant used violence directly against the victim at the scene after the Defendant d, and the Defendant and D used it directly.