All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-misunderstanding (Defendant B) Defendant B merely told the victim D and E to assault Defendant A who is her husband, but did not assault the victim D.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court (Defendant A: fine of KRW 1 million, and fine of KRW 700,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to Defendant B’s assertion of mistake of facts, Defendant B may fully recognize the facts of assaulting the victim D’s chest by his hand as shown in the judgment below, and the above assertion by Defendant B is without merit.

B. The victims of the judgment on the defendants' unfair assertion of sentencing were first assaulted by Defendant A's chest or shoulder, and the defendants led to the crime of this case, and there was considerable responsibility for the victims to commit the crime.

It appears that Defendant A appears to be 80 years of age, Defendant B is 77 years of age, and Defendant A has no criminal history since 2000, and Defendant B has no criminal history, and Defendant B is the first offender.

However, the lower court appears to have determined the sentence by taking into account all the favorable circumstances as seen above, and there was no circumstance to change the sentencing of the lower court after the sentence of the lower judgment, and in light of the method and frequency of the assault committed by Defendant A to the victims, Defendant B, respectively, and the victim D, the degree of the assault committed by the Defendants is minor.

In full view of the following: (a) the Defendants’ character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime; and (b) the various sentencing conditions as indicated in the instant records and the previous theories, the lower court’s punishment against the Defendants is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the above assertion by the Defendants is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the Defendants’ appeal is without merit.