All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The appellant who made a decision on Defendant B’s appeal shall submit the appellate brief to the appellate court within 20 days from the date on which he received the notification of the receipt of the trial record (Article 361-3(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act), and if the appellate brief is not submitted within the said period, the appellate court shall

(1) According to the records, Defendant B did not submit the statement of grounds for appeal within the due period for submission of the written notification of the notification of the receipt of the trial records on July 15, 2016; Defendant B did not state the grounds for appeal in the petition of appeal; and Defendant B cannot find any grounds for ex officio investigation even upon examining the records.

Therefore, it is necessary to decide to dismiss Defendant B’s appeal pursuant to Article 361-4(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act. However, as long as the judgment is rendered on Defendant A’s appeal, the dismissal of appeal is not separately decided and the judgment is also rendered.

2. Judgment on Defendant A’s appeal

A. The summary of the grounds for appeal (1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles on the following grounds, asserts that the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

㈎ 원심은 피해자가 좌측 발가락 및 발등 부위 3, 4도 방사선 화상을 입었다고 인정하였으나, 진단서(증거기록 제32쪽, 제54쪽)에 의하면, 피해자가 입은 화상은 3도이다.

㈏ 피고인은 의료기기 판매업자인 B의 ‘정상제품이며 허가났다’는 말을 믿고 이 사건 전기 찜질기를 구입한 것이며, 가사 피고인에게 이를 제대로 확인하지 않은 과실이 있다고 하더라도 이 사건 전기 찜질기는 일반가정에서 찜질기로 사용할 수 있는 것으로서 피해자에게도 사용할 수 있는 것이다.

㈐ 피고인은 피해자의 상태를 살피고 이 사건 전기 찜질기를 이용하였으며, 만약 피해자가 봉와직염을 앓고 있다는...