The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that it is difficult to see that the defendant inflicted an injury on the victims jointly with C, the court below found the defendant not guilty of the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint injury) against the defendant, and rendered a judgment dismissing the defendant on the ground of the victim E's intention not to punish the victim E. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the facts that the defendant inflicted an injury on the victims jointly with C, and based on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant inflicted an injury on the victims.

2. The court below made a statement to the effect that victims (E and F) who had been at the scene were at the time of the instant case and D and victim E at the time of physical fighting, and that they were at the time of the instant case after the physical fighting, and that there was no part in the Defendant’s participation when they were victims as above. The evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to acknowledge that the Defendant was in common with C at the time, and that there was no other evidence to acknowledge that there was an injury to the victims. The court below acquitted the victims of the crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint injury). The court below affirmed the judgment of the court below to the purport that the court below was justified in light of the following circumstances presented by the court below for the reason that there was no other evidence to acknowledge it. D at the time was lawfully adopted and can be recognized by the evidence duly and investigated by the Defendant and the victims, i.e., D at the time was physically fighting once between the Defendant and the victims at the fourth trial date of the first instance trial.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is without merit.