The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is only the defendant's daily conduct and the victims, and there was no assault against the victims in collaboration with B and D as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment below.

2. The evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below (However, according to the records of this case, it is acknowledged that the court below did not adopt the suspect interrogation protocol against the defendant as evidence. In light of the summary of the evidence in the court below's judgment, "each of the police interrogation protocol against the defendant 1." appears to be an obvious clerical error in the "each of the police interrogation protocol against the defendant 2 and D". In light of the records, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant assaulted the victims as stated in the facts of the crime in the judgment of the court below in conjunction with B and D. Thus, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

The defendant submitted a statement of telephone conversations while making a dispute later by making separation from his daily activities at the time of the instant case. According to the above statement of telephone conversations, the defendant appears to have made a telephone conversation between 01:06 and 49 on September 9, 2012 and 01:09 on the same day and between 01:09 and 58 seconds on September 9, 2012. However, the facts charged in the instant case are that the defendant committed violence against the victims on September 9, 2012 in collaboration with B and D, namely, around 01:10, before and after 01:10, the defendant also committed violence against the victims, and the defendant was also aware that the victim Eul, who was his daily activities, was in close vicinity to the scene of the instant case since the date and time of the instant facts charged, the defendant could not be found guilty of interference with the monetary statements submitted by the defendant.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is without merit.