All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant (the misunderstanding of legal principle and the misunderstanding of facts) did not have any fact that the Defendant was protruding the victim, and the injury of the victim does not constitute a legal injury.

B. Inspection (Definite and misunderstanding of legal principles) The instant stone constitutes dangerous goods with a size of 3 cm in diameter.

Even if the size of the stone of this case does not reach 3 cm in diameter, it constitutes a dangerous article.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below regarding the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles are: (a) the victim stated from the investigative agency to the court below to the effect that “each Defendant was able to take a look at, and one of the stones was left”; and (b) E, a police officer called to the scene upon the victim’s report, was in the court of the court below, and there was a room in the court of the court below that “on the spot, there was a room for the victim’s arms to be unfolded.” On the other hand, the head of the court below stated to the effect that the victim did not appear to have been faced with the victim’s arms. The victim did not appear to have been able to have been exposed to the victim’s 6th hand on the top of the victim’s body photograph taken by the police officer, and the victim did not appear to have been able to have suffered any significant damage to the police officer’s first hand on the part of the victim’s body. The victim did not appear to the police officer’s 2nd.