As above, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The lower court, based on its stated reasoning, is difficult to recognize a public recruitment relationship with the Defendant and F.

In light of this, the lower court acquitted this part of the charges.

In addition, considering the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below, the above judgment of the court below is just and there is no error of law by mistake of facts as otherwise alleged by the prosecutor in the judgment below.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion of mistake is without merit.

The victim C and H make a statement to the effect that both F et al. were fighting for the first time, and even based on CCTV images taken at the time of the instant case, it is confirmed that the Defendant and C et al. prevents the remainder of the Defendant, including F, from putting in and wrapping at “E main points,” and they are fighting with the Defendant and C.

Since then, in the situation where the Defendant and C were to fall down, F was at the time of face of C due to the occurrence of Si expenses between F and C.

G이 싸움을 말려 싸움이 멈췄다.

After that, it is only confirmed that the defendant prices C with D and C, and it cannot be confirmed that the defendant and F together commit assault against C.

In the above process, the defendant mainly committed violence to the victims, and the defendant does not seem to have expressed his/her intention to F to help him/her, and it seems that the defendant could not be anticipated that F will be at the time of C.

In full view of the above circumstances, F’s assaulting C is the fighting between the Defendant and C.