A. Defendant A1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles only the victim’s grandchildren to communicate with the victim. Thus, the lower court’s judgment convicting the Defendant of all the charges is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. Even if the Defendant did not so, the lower court’s sentencing (fine 300,000) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B 1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as the victim puts a part of the victim’s KON to the extent that the victim did not have an intention of assault. Even if the victim’s act constitutes an act of assault, it is not illegal as it constitutes an act of assault, and even if it does not constitute an act of assault, the court below found the Defendant guilty of all the facts charged against the Defendant, which erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. 2) Even if not, the court below’s sentencing (a fine of 300,000 won) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

A. In light of the records, a thorough examination of Defendant A’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, and the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below in light of the records, the court below is justified in holding that Defendant A’s act constitutes a assault on the grounds of its stated reasoning, such as the date and time indicated in the facts charged, the victim’s handout at the place, the victim’s handout, and the facilitation of another person’s exercise of force against the victim. In so doing, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the concept of mistake of facts or assault as asserted by Defendant A.