The part of the judgment of the court below against Defendant A shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Defendant

BC and.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

A. Defendant BC 1 had a misunderstanding of facts when the victim BE was drinking once more than 2-3 times, and the victim BK was drinking once more than 2-3 times. However, although there was no injury upon the victims as stated in the facts charged, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged was erroneous and adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment. 2) Even if it was not so unfair sentencing, the sentence (eight months of imprisonment) imposed by the court of first instance against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

B. Each sentence (the first instance judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for 8 months and 2 months: imprisonment with prison labor for 1 year and 6 months) sentenced by the lower court is too unreasonable.

C. The prosecutor’s first instance court’s each sentence sentenced to Defendant BD and BE (Defendant BD: imprisonment of eight months, suspension of execution of two years, Defendant BE: fine of three million won) is too uneased and unreasonable.

Defendant

The first and second court rendered a separate judgment against A after the court below completed a separate trial against A, and each of the above judgments was appealed against A by Defendant A, and this court rendered a decision to consolidate the above two appeals cases. The first and second court's judgment against Defendant is related to concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and must be sentenced to a single sentence within the scope of punishment aggravated for concurrent crimes under Article 38 (1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the part against Defendant A among the judgment of the court below is not exempt from all reversal.

Defendant

Judgment on the grounds for appeal by BC

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the court below based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, namely, BL and BK stated in the investigative agency that Defendant BC had inflicted injury upon the victims as stated in the facts charged. In particular, BK was the head of the prosecution at the time of the instant case.