A. Error of facts and misapprehension of legal principles did not have the intention of assault against the Defendants, and it is difficult to see that the Defendants’ act constitutes a tangible exercise of force to the extent that it constitutes assault.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (Defendant A: a fine of 200,000 won, Defendant B: a fine of 300,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Although the judgment of the court below on the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles alleged that the Defendants had no intention of assault, the court below rejected the above assertion on the grounds as stated in its reasoning and found the Defendants guilty of the facts charged in this case by taking account of the evidence so presented. In light of the records, the court below's decision is just and acceptable, and it is sufficient to view the Defendants' act as an exercise of force against the victim that constitutes an assault in the crime of assault.

Therefore, the court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles or misconception of facts as alleged by the Defendants.

The defendants' assertion of mistake and misapprehension of legal principles is without merit.

B. Compared to the first instance court’s judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing, and where the first instance court’s sentencing does not exceed the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court, as stated in its holding, determined the punishment by comprehensively taking into account the circumstances favorable to the Defendants and unfavorable circumstances, and there is no special change in circumstances that may change the sentence of the lower court in the trial.

Taking full account of the following circumstances, the Defendants’ age, occupation, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, health status, criminal records and contents thereof in an investigation agency and court, attitude in the crime, nature of the crime, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., as well as the conditions for sentencing specified in the original judgment and the party hearing.