The guilty part against Defendant A and D shall be reversed, respectively.

Defendant

A A Fines 2,500,000 won, Defendant .

A. Defendant A, B, C, D, and F’s grounds for appeal 1) misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles. ① As to the part of the judgment below (the part of the case of the case of 2009Da3274) as to the violation of the Punishment of Violence, etc. Act (joint injury) against Victim L on July 28, 2008, Defendant A did not inflict any injury on Defendant B jointly with the victim due to plucking, plouting, etc. of the victim’s right hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand, and the victim L used physical force against the victim L at the time of the crime of this part, and this constitutes self-defense under the Criminal Act, since Defendant A merely used physical force against the victim L at the time of the crime of this part.

② As to the part of the judgment of the court below (the part of the case No. 2009No. 276) against the victimO on September 18, 2008, Defendant A did not assault the victimO as stated in this part of the crime, and at the time of the crime of this part, Defendant A was driving a vehicle to prevent the CCTV camera installed by the M&A project association (hereinafter “the association of this case”) from photographing Defendant A from photographing Defendant A and went into the place where CCTV was located. However, the victimO violated Defendant A’s course without good cause, and this constitutes legitimate self-defense or legitimate act under the Criminal Act.

③ As to the damage and damage of property on September 9, 2008 among the judgment below (the part of the case No. 2009Da400) (the part of the case), Defendant A did not have any damage by throwing away or destroying the wind, etc. owned by the association of this case.

④ Of the lower judgment (the part of the case No. 2009No400), there was no injury on the part of the victim P on September 9, 2008; Defendant A did not inflict an injury on the victim P by means of dulfing fals of the victim P and daleing fals, etc.

⑤ Of the lower judgment (the part on the instant case No. 2009No400), the part on interference with the business of the victim Q Q on September 9, 2008