1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court as to Defendant B’s grounds of appeal, the lower court is justifiable to have found the Defendant guilty of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint injury) and the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint intrusion) among the facts charged against the Defendant on the grounds indicated in its reasoning. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules,

Meanwhile, the argument that the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to self-denunciation is not a legitimate ground of appeal, as it is alleged in the ground of appeal that the defendant did not consider it as the ground of appeal or as the subject of judgment ex officio.

2. On the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor, the court below reversed the judgment of the court of first instance which found the Defendants guilty on the grounds that there was no proof of crime as to the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective weapon, injury by a deadly weapon, etc.) and the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a violation of the Act on the Punishment of

The judgment below

In light of the records, the above judgment of the court below is just and acceptable. Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors of exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules or violating the rules

Meanwhile, although the prosecutor appealed to the entire judgment of the court below, the part of the conviction against the Defendants was not indicated in the petition of appeal, and the appellate brief does not state the grounds for objection.

3. Therefore, all appeals are to be filed.