All A and prosecutor appeals are dismissed.

A. Defendant A 1) misunderstanding the facts (as to the conviction in the judgment of the court below), Defendant A did not assault the victim.

A witness G, the most objective witness, did not see that the defendant did not assault the victim.

H and I, together with the victim, have made a statement, only the testimony favorable to the victim, and the statement has no credibility.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (4 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) misunderstanding of facts (as to the part not guilty in the judgment of the court below), ① According to the statements of the victim, witness H and I, Defendant B may sufficiently recognize the facts of assault.

② The victim complained of the victim’s knee part of the knee part of the victim’s knee is a chronic disease since the victim’s injury was stated only as “half-month snee,” in the medical certificate issued officially by M hospital, when the first hospital was in the emergency room, and the victim’s kne part of the victim’s kne part was also caused by Defendant A’s act according to evidence and factual inquiries submitted by the prosecutor.

2) Undue sentencing (for Defendant A), the lower court’s sentence is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. As to the Defendant A’s assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court also asserted as identical to the assertion of mistake of the above facts, and the lower court rejected the Defendant A’s assertion in detail by providing a detailed statement of the judgment on this part of the allegation under the title “the judgment on issues” in the judgment.

In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, the lower court’s determination is justifiable, and it did not err by misapprehending the facts pointed out by Defendant A.

1) Police officers who were called up upon 112 reports at the time shall J.