The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of two years and six months.

Defendant

B shall be punished by a fine of three million won.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A 1) In fact, Defendant A did not take the victim’s head.

Witness

L/M is a family member of Defendant B, and it is difficult to recognize the credibility of the statement because it appears that Defendant B made a favorable statement in favor of Defendant B. Even according to various CCTV images, Defendant A took the head of the victim.

It is insufficient to recognize it.

Rather, Defendant B abused the face of the victim and died due to the shock of the head on the floor.

On the other premise than this, the court below found Defendant A guilty of the facts charged in this case on the premise that there is an error of mistake of facts.

2) Since Defendant A was in a state of mental disorder under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant case, he/she is not subject to criminal liability or his/her punishment should be mitigated.

3) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (five years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) The sentence imposed by the lower court against Defendant A is too unfasible and unreasonable.

2) Defendant B misunderstanding the fact-finding and misapprehension of the legal doctrine, Defendant B’s face with strong price, and the victim exceeded the victim’s face, and his head fell against the floor.

After that, the defendant A taken four-time faces of the victim.

The relation between the victim's death and the victim's death was not revealed as a result of the autopsy.

Therefore, Defendant B also constitutes a crime of death or injury according to the special exception to the same model.

Nevertheless, the lower court rendered a judgment not guilty on this part.

Even if Defendant B is not allowed to commit the crime of bodily injury, the crime of assault or bodily injury is recognized.

The lower court did not render a judgment on the reduction of the amount.

The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine and misunderstanding of the aforementioned facts.

B) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to Defendant B (a sum of KRW 1.5 million) is too unhued and unfair.