The judgment below

Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine of four million won.

Defendant

A.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In full view of the Defendant B’s statement of mistake of facts and the written diagnosis of injury on Defendant B, etc., the fact that Defendant A inflicted an injury on the right-hand hand of Defendant B by hand is recognized. In addition, according to the Defendant’s statement, etc., the fact that Defendant B’s drinking drinking by Defendant B was at the left-hand face of Defendant A is also acknowledged. Nevertheless, the lower court acquitted Defendant A of the fact that Defendant A inflicted an injury on the right-hand hand of Defendant B by her hand, and that Defendant B was at the left-hand face of Defendant B by drinking, and that Defendant B was acquitted of the fact when the left-hand face of Defendant A by Defendant B, the lower court erred by misapprehending the fact and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. 2) In so doing, each of the lower judgment of unfair sentencing (a fine of KRW 2 million, a fine of KRW 1.5 million, and a fine of KRW 1.5 million) is unreasonable.

B. Defendant B: Error of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, Defendant B merely pushed Defendant A in the process of duplicating fats by Defendant A, but did not look at Defendant A’s head.

Defendant

B’s above act constitutes a legitimate act by passive resistance.

Nevertheless, the lower court found Defendant B guilty on the part of Defendant B by recognizing that Defendant B had engaged in flapsing, and thus, erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court and the evidence duly admitted and examined by the prosecutor’s judgment on the prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of facts against Defendant A, Defendant A suffered an injury by using the victim’s right-hand hand.

Therefore, the prosecutor's argument that points this out is justified.

(1) As to the part of the judgment of the court below that "the defendant A has satisfed his right-hand hand over, from the investigative agency to the court of the court below."