The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A and B shall be punished by imprisonment for eight months, and by imprisonment for four months, respectively.

except that this shall not apply.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court’s sentence against the prosecutor’s Defendants (10 months of imprisonment, 6 months of suspended sentence, 2 years of suspended sentence, and 240 hours of community service) is too uneased and unreasonable.

B. Defendant A and B’s sentence is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendants: (a) committed a dispute between the victim and the victim, and (b) took place at the scene of the party; (c) 4 persons, including the Defendants, were fighting with each other; and (d) inflicted an injury on the victim H; and (e) Defendant B assaulted the victim I to speak.

The victim H suffered serious injury, such as the bones of the bones and the bones of the snow, as a result of continuing multiple harm without scambling, even though they seem to be the manager of the scambling.

Both Defendants have the record of being investigated into violent crimes, and Defendants B and C have the record of being subject to criminal punishment for violent crimes.

On the other hand, the victim H does not seem to have been seriously disturbed, and the Defendants do not want to punish the Defendants by mutual consent with the victims.

At the time of committing the crime, all the Defendants were 20 years old and young, and they seem to have an attitude to recognize and reflect the mistake after committing the crime.

The family and the surrounding people of the Defendants are leading the Defendants to a sound social person.

And the social ties seem to be.

There is no history that both the Defendants were punished by a fine exceeding the fine, and Defendant C is minor in relation to the other Defendants.

As above, in light of the unfavorable or favorable circumstances to the Defendants and other various conditions regarding sentencing, such as the character, conduct, environment, family relationship, the background and method of the commission of the crime, and the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the lower court’s punishment against the Defendants is somewhat minor.

It cannot be said that it is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the prosecutor's assertion is without merit, and it receives the defendant A and B's argument.