The judgment below

Part concerning Defendant A, B, and C shall be reversed, respectively.

Defendant

A. In 10 months of imprisonment, Defendant B.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Defendant

A, B, and C: The sentence of the lower court on unreasonable sentencing (10 months of imprisonment, 6 months of imprisonment, and 8 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

The Prosecutor (Defendant D and E): In light of the fact that Defendant D, E, and E jointly with Defendant A, B, and C for an injury to the victims, the credibility of the statements made by the victims is high, and considering the victim's statements and site conditions at the time of the victims' statements, the court below found Defendant D, B, and C for an injury to the victims. However, the court below acquitted Defendant D and E, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misconception of the fact.

Judgment

Defendant

The Defendants jointly participated in the crime and inflicted serious injury on the victims by jointly taking part in the judgment on the assertion on unfair sentencing of A, B, and C are under circumstances unfavorable to the Defendants, but the Defendants acknowledged the crime of this case and reflect it. In the trial, Defendant A and Defendant B did not want to be punished against the Defendants by mutual consent between the victim F, Defendant B and the victims, and Defendant C, respectively, and the Defendants were also subject to partial assault from the victims. Defendant B and C have no criminal record. There are circumstances favorable to each Defendant.

In addition, considering all of the sentencing conditions in the instant case, such as character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the Defendants, the role and degree of participation in the instant crime, and circumstances after the commission of the crime, it is deemed that the sentence of the lower court against the Defendants is too unreasonable.

According to the records of this case's judgment on the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts, when the victim G is investigated by an investigative agency, the person who was suffering from victim H at the entrance of the underground parking lot of the building is the defendant.