All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment as to Defendant A’s grounds of appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court’s determination that the Defendant was guilty of violating the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint injury) with respect to the victimO among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning is justifiable. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of logic and experience and by misapprehending the legal doctrine on

In addition, considering various circumstances revealed in the records, such as the process of committing a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint injury) and the crime of destruction, and the defendant's act before and after the crime, it is difficult to view that the defendant was in the state of mental disorder or mental and physical disability at the time of the above crime, and therefore, there is no illegality of not recognizing mental and physical

Meanwhile, under Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the argument that the sentencing of the punishment is unreasonable

2. Examining the grounds of appeal by Defendant B in light of the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court, which maintained the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below was just in finding the Defendant guilty of violating the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint injury) with respect to victim N among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning. In so doing, the court below erred by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence and exceeding the bounds of the principle of logic and experience