All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of the Defendants’ resistance

A. In the event of assault by misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, Defendant A, etc., Defendant B her bridged the victim’s bridge, but Defendant B left the above scene of assault.

Defendant

After leaving the scene of the vehicle B, Defendant A, due to his appearance, took the victim's face, taken the victim's face, taken the victim's face, taken the victim's face, and taken the victim's face. Defendant B, in collaboration with Defendant A, inflicted an injury on the victim.

shall not be deemed to exist.

B. The sentence of the lower court ( ① one year of imprisonment with prison labor, ② Defendant B’s imprisonment with prison labor) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court determined as follows based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court on the assertion of misunderstanding the facts and the legal doctrine.

① At the time of the instant case, the Defendants: (a) been on board a vehicle driven by Defendant A and was able to shock the victim of the pedestrian while walking; (b) the victim, as indicated in the judgment of the court below, was tightly sealed by Defendant A twice; (c) the victim was tightly pushed by hand; (d) the victim was towed by her hand at one time; (c) the victim was towed by her back; and (d) the Defendant B was also able to walk the victim’s bridge with the bridge; (c) the Defendant B was also able to have the victim walk up to the floor; and (d) the defect was able to remove the victim’s movement to another place as indicated in the judgment of the court below; and (e) the Defendant B was able to have a sufficient influence on the victim’s action against the Defendant, and (e) the defect was able to continue to run the vehicle with the vehicle stopped over both lanes.