All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A1) The Defendant was physically and mentally weak at the time of committing the crime.

2) The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (1) The misunderstanding of the legal doctrine and the misunderstanding of the legal doctrine did not constitute an assault against the victims jointly with A, and the Defendant’s act cannot be evaluated as a joint assault.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (4 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant’s decision on whether or not the Defendant A’s physical and mental weakness was guilty of having drinking alcohol at the time of committing each crime as indicated in the judgment of the court below, but, in light of the background leading up to the crime, the means and method of the crime, and the circumstances before and after the crime, there was a lack of ability to discern things or make decisions.

does not appear.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion is rejected.

B. The phrase “when two or more persons jointly commit a crime of injury or assault” under Article 2(2) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act as to Defendant B’s misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine requires that there exists a so-called co-offender relationship between the two or more persons. In addition, where several persons are aware of another person’s crime at the same place with the same opportunity and commit the crime using the same opportunity (see Supreme Court Decision 90Do2153, Jan. 29, 1991). In a joint principal offender who jointly processes and commits the crime, there is no need to directly or explicitly obtain the conspiracy or conspiracy, and there is a combination of intent to jointly realize it with the intention to jointly process the crime, but in any case, if the Defendant denies the criminal intent along with the conspiracy, the facts constituting such subjective element should be an indirect fact or circumstantial fact that has considerable relation to the criminal intent.