The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

B shall be punished by imprisonment for a period of five months.

However, the period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (unfair sentencing)’s sentence is too heavy.

B. Defendant B (misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, misunderstanding of sentencing, and misunderstanding of legal principles: There is no injury or assault against the victims.

The punishment of the court below is too heavy.

(c)

The Prosecutor (unfair sentencing against Defendant A)’s sentence is too weak.

2. Determination

A. As to the grounds for appeal by Defendant A, the Defendant reached an agreement with the victim, and the victim prepared and submitted a written agreement to the effect that the Defendant is not subject to punishment.

In addition, when considering the conditions of sentencing as shown in the record, it is necessary to re-determine the sentence because the sentence of the court below against the defendant is too unfair because it is too unreasonable.

B. 1) In full view of the evidence examined by the lower court and the first instance court as to the grounds for appeal against Defendant B, even if the Defendant excluded from the legal statement of L’s witness who is doubtful on credibility, it can be acknowledged that the Defendant inflicted an injury on the victim I as stated in the lower judgment, and assault the victim J as to the grounds for appeal against Defendant B.

① The lower court found credibility in the victim’s statement

There is no circumstance to deem that such a judgment is remarkably unfair (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Do7917, Jan. 30, 2009, etc.). ② The victim I written the first written statement concerning the damage, including the purport that “the defendant assaulted knee against knee on a bridge,” and specifically stated the work suffered from the defendant.

Considering the above written statement, it cannot be readily concluded that the said victim’s statement was false solely on the ground that the victim made a somewhat late statement about knee-free knee-free kne, due to the Defendant’s act.

③ It appears that the above victim did not receive any specific treatment from the hospital, but “the knife too early a wave.”