All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendants committed an intentional act of assault, with the aim of breaking the victim E who illegally occupied the above office by impairing the second floor office (hereinafter referred to as the “G”) of the company (hereinafter referred to as the “instant office”) which is engaged in the business of manufacturing natural cosmetics, and moving the victim E who illegally occupied the above office (hereinafter referred to as the “instant office”) out of the office.

할 수 없고, 피고인 A은 위 사무실 안으로 들어오려던 피해자 H을 입구에서 막고 양팔로 밀어냈을 뿐 위 피해자의 목덜미를 잡고 바닥에 넘어뜨린 적이 없으며, 피해자들의 상해는 피고인들의 폭행으로 인하여 발생한 것이 아니라 꽈샤시술로 발생한 것으로 보인다.

B. In light of the legal principles, the police did not take measures to leave the office of this case for civil matters, and thus, it constitutes a minimum act of self-defense or self-help as necessary, while there is no other measure to take necessary measures in a situation where it is difficult for the police to take necessary measures without taking measures to leave the office of this case for a long time for the reason that it is a civil case. In addition, the Defendants did not recognize the act of this situation as unlawful.

2. Determination

A. (1) According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the first instance court and the first instance court on the instant crime against the victim E, the Defendant A led the above victim’s right side bridge, Defendant B, and the above victim’s defect in order to attract the victim’s left side bridge to the outside of the office around 18:00 on January 22, 2012, and Defendant C was found to have caused the above victim’s escape. Defendant C’s defect in order to not let the victim see the above victim’s door, was found to have caused the above victim’s left side bridge, and the Defendants also committed the crime of assault.