Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

A. As to the crime of joint injury to the victim D, Defendant and G constituted an assault as described in the judgment of the court below in order to protect their body by assaulting the victim D and E first, and preventing them, so the Defendant’s act constitutes self-defense or legitimate act. (ii) With respect to the crime of injury to the victim E, the injury suffered by the victim is not caused by the Defendant’s assault, but in the course of the victim’s assaulting the Defendant, vain or vain.

And even if the defendant's act was caused by the defendant's assault, illegality is excluded because the defendant's act constitutes self-defense or legitimate act.

3) Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which convicted the charged facts of this case has an error of law by misunderstanding facts or misunderstanding legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. The sentence of the court below on the grounds of unfair sentencing (a fine of three million won) is too unreasonable. 2. Prior to the judgment of the court below on the grounds of appeal by the defendant ex officio. If there is a prosecutor’s application for changes in indictment which completely withdraws the charged facts among several charged facts in substantive concurrent relationship, it is obvious that this part of the indictment is revoked, if it does not have the form of application for revocation of the indictment, it shall be deemed as revocation of the indictment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 88Do67, Mar. 22, 198). According to the records of this case, the prosecutor of the court below’s second trial was to delete the charged facts pertaining to assault on the date of the second trial, and subsequently correct the indictment by oral statement, according to Article 260 of the Criminal Act, the facts charged about assault against the victim F.