All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles 1) Defendant A suffered damage to the outer walls or glass of the E building in order to install a sloping beam which is a cost of supporting the fence at the construction site. Some of the shot beams attached to the Gu was affected by the Defendant’s land. Defendant A resisted the boundary of the E building, and the sloping beams attached to the sloping beams in order to prevent damage to the building. Defendant A committed an act of cutting the slopings into the slopings as stated in the facts of the crime in the judgment in order to prevent damage to the building and preventing the installation of the sloping beams from being installed. Since this act is insignificant, Defendant B did not constitute a legitimate act that does not interfere with the business or does not violate social rules. Although the shot beams were made, this is merely a mere emotional or temporary dummatic sign, and thus, it does not constitute a threat that flows into the construction site. Defendant B’s order to treat wastewater as the victim’s damage to the sewage.

The sewage has been discharged intentionally.

This constitutes a legitimate act that does not violate social rules.

3) Defendant C victim J taken the Defendant C’s cell phone, the third party’s clothes, and Defendant C took the arms of the victim J, as stated in the facts constituting an offense in order to restrain it. As such, Defendant C’s act constitutes a justifiable act that does not constitute assault nor does it violate social rules. (b) The sentence of the lower court on unreasonable sentencing (Defendant A: KRW 500,00,000,000,000,000,000,000 won, and KRW 30,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000)