The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of punishment against the Defendants shall be suspended.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal: (a) the Defendants do not have any assaulting the victim as stated in the facts charged; (b) instead, the victimized person spreaded the Defendant’s bath to the her bath, thereby damaging the breath; and (c) the Defendant Company A gets the arms of the victim contingently; and even if the Defendant’s domestic violence is recognized, the Defendants cannot be deemed as joint assault with the absence of joint intent as to the assault.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the fact or joint assault, thereby finding the Defendants guilty.

② Even if the sentencing was found guilty, each sentence (a fine of KRW 700,000) sentenced by the lower court to the Defendants is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts or legal principles, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, the victim C was present at the investigative agency and court of the court below to enter the association office in the name of the head of the association, and the defendant B’s body was prevented at the entrance, and the defendant B started fighting with one another by giving priority to the body of his own body. While the parties’ statements concerning the process and details of the physical fighting are different, it appears that the victim, the members of the association, and the defendants who want to stop fighting to enter the association office at the time of the day-to-day, as stated in the facts charged, and the situation where the victim suffered injury to the victim was present at the court of the court below as well as the members of the court of the court below, but in light of the contents of testimony, etc., the victim C was unable to accurately memory the situation at the time.