A. Fact-misunderstanding or misapprehension of legal principles did not assault the victims who are co-defendants of the first instance trial, and there was a little act to recognize them as a somewhat assault.

Even though it was merely a legitimate act to defend an unfair attack, the court below found the defendant guilty and erred by misunderstanding the facts or misunderstanding the legal principles.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (an amount of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant inflicted bodily injury by assaulting the victim by taking breath or b, in collaboration with C beyond simply defending the defendant according to the contents of each police interrogation protocol against A and B, and the I’s testimony, and it cannot be deemed as a legitimate act.

In the same purport, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged against the defendant is just and it does not contain any error of law, and this part of the defendant's assertion is rejected

B. Although the court below has already determined the amount of fine in consideration of such circumstances as the defendant's age, sexual conduct, intelligence and environment, means and method of crime, and circumstances after the crime was committed, the court below's punishment is too unreasonable and it cannot be accepted that the defendant's assertion on this part is too unreasonable, considering the following circumstances: the defendant's age, sexual conduct, intelligence and environment, method and method of crime, and the circumstances after the crime was committed.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.