All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor to the summary of the grounds for appeal, the court below found the Defendants guilty of the facts charged of this case sufficiently, but the court below acquitted the Defendants. In so doing, the court below erred by misunderstanding of facts.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is that Defendant A is a C redevelopment promotion member, Defendant B is a head of the C redevelopment task, and the victim D(57 years of age) is a person opposing C redevelopment.

On February 2, 2018, at around 21:10, the Defendants came to know that the victim distributed promotional materials of the content opposing the redevelopment C, and Defendant B became aware of the distribution of promotional materials of the content opposing the redevelopment C, and Defendant A had the face of the victim at hand, and Defendant A had the face of the victim two times by hand.

As a result, the Defendants jointly put up the victim about about 14 days of treatment, such as the impairment of the character of face that needs to be treated for about 14 days.

B. In light of the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of evaluating the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court in light of the contents of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, or in exceptional cases where it is deemed significantly unreasonable to maintain the first instance court’s determination as to the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court in full view of the results of the first instance court’s examination and the results of additional evidence examination conducted by the time of closing argument in the appellate court, the appellate court should not reverse without permission the first instance court’s determination on the grounds that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance differs from the appellate court’s determination.