The prosecutor and the defendants' appeals are dismissed, respectively.

The summary of the grounds for appeal by Defendant A is merely a misunderstanding of the facts of appeal by Defendant A, which caused the victim to go off, and there is no way to support the victim's bridge by taking it over on the ground floor.

Even in the victim's death diagnosis report, there is no injury to the part of the bridge.

The appeal by Defendant B against sentencing: The defendant misunderstanding the fact that the victims attempted to prevent the victims from infringing their portrait rights by affixing video pictures, and there is no injury to the victims.

The Prosecutor’s appeal against Defendant B: Considering the difference between the spirit of substantial direct deliberation and the method of evaluating the credibility of the first instance court and the appellate court’s determination on the assertion of mistake of the facts regarding Defendant A’s appeal against sentencing unfair, the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court was clearly erroneous in light of the contents of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined in the first instance court.

Except in exceptional cases where it is deemed significantly unfair to maintain the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance court by taking account of the results of the first instance examination and the results of the further examination of evidence conducted until the closing of pleadings at the appellate court, the appellate court shall not reverse without permission the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court.

The Defendant argued to the same effect in the lower court.

The court below found credibility in the statement after directly examining the witness, such as the victim, etc.

Based on the judgment of the court below, criminal facts were admitted as evidence, and there are no special circumstances to deem that the first deliberation judgment was clearly erroneous or that it is considerably unfair to maintain it as it is.

In full view of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, including the victim's legal statement, the facts constituting the crime in the judgment below are recognized, and the judgment of the court below is made.