Defendant

All appeals filed by B and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. According to the prosecutor(s) B and F’s statement, photographs taken of B’s face immediately after the instant case, and the written diagnosis of injury against B, Defendant A can be acknowledged as having inflicted an injury by assaulting B as shown in the facts charged of this case.

Even if it is not recognized that Defendant A inflicted an injury on Defendant B, according to the evidence submitted by the prosecution, at least the fact that Defendant A committed an act of assault, such as flabing or destroying b’s flab at the time of the instant case, in the process of dispute with Defendant A, but the lower court failed to rate it as a crime of assault, was erroneous in failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations and omitting judgment.

B. Defendant B (UB)’s punishment (a fine of KRW 3 million) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts, the judgment of the court below is as follows: (1) The defendant A made a statement that corresponds to the facts charged in this case, i.e., (b) although Eul made a statement that corresponds to the facts charged in this case, it appears that the situation at the time of this case was considerably interested and considerable memory is unclear; (2) although the defendant A made a statement that corresponds to the facts charged in this case, as witness B made a statement that corresponds to part of the facts charged in this case, it is hard to say that the F complies with the circumstances at the time of this case, although he was aware that the F was able to observe most of the circumstances at the time of this case, he could not be able to memory the defendant A, and (3) he made a statement that he made it difficult to memory the defendant A by himself while he was aware that the F was able to protect his face at the time of this case.