A. Since misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles assaulted the victim outside of the drinking house by Defendant A and assaulted the victim at the drinking house, the Defendants do not jointly assault the victim.

B. The lower court’s punishment of unreasonable sentencing (2 million won by each fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the phrase “when two or more persons jointly commit the crime of injury or assault” under Article 2(2) of the Punishment of Violences Act requires that there exists a so-called co-offender relationship between them. Moreover, several persons are aware of the crimes committed by another person on the same opportunity at the same place and commit the crime using the same opportunity (Supreme Court Decision 2013Do4430 Decided November 28, 2013). According to evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, according to the evidence duly adopted by the court below, ① the victim and the victim drinking alcohol as the victim drinking alcohol while Defendant A tried to take the place where Defendant A wanted to take a toilet, and come out of the drinking house, ② Defendant B and the victim sent back to the drinking place and come out of the drinking house, and Defendant B and the victim was aware of the same opportunity to commit the crime of assault and assault in front of the victim in front of the same manner at the place where the victim took advantage of the two or more facts.”

Therefore, the defendants' assertion of mistake and misapprehension of legal principles is without merit.

(b).