Defendant

D All appeals against the Defendants by the prosecutor and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the prosecutor 1) found the fact that the defendants conspired to commit the crime of assault, etc., and found the defendant D not guilty of the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint attack) and found the defendant A and B not guilty of the facts. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court to Defendant D (six months of imprisonment) is too unhued and unreasonable.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court to Defendant D (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court, on the grounds of detailed circumstances, found Defendant D’s 150,00 won from the injured party in collusion with Defendant A and B, on the ground that the lower court found the Prosecutor’s misunderstanding of facts.

For the reason that there is no clear evidence to determine the person, Defendant D was acquitted of the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint conflict) and found Defendant A and B not guilty of the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint conflict) and found Defendant A and B not guilty of the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint conflict).

As above, the court below's aforementioned determination is just and acceptable, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts as alleged by the prosecutor, in light of the records and thorough examination of the circumstances presented by the court below.

It does not appear.

Therefore, this part of the prosecutor's argument is without merit.

B. The instant crime of determining the Prosecutor’s improper assertion of sentencing against Defendant D and Defendant D’s improper assertion of sentencing is to be reported to the police as a sex offense against the victim.

In order to attract money by intimidation, the nature of the crime is bad in light of the method of crime.

Defendant

D has been subject to punishment of a fine of KRW 500,000 for the crime of extortion in 2011.

On the other hand, the amount of the instant revolving is relatively large in KRW 1.50,00,000, and is in depth.