The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In a situation where employees, such as the victim F, etc., are in a state of double arms of the defendant, the defendant was able to see the part of the defendant's bridge to the defendant's head with a solid article that is the same as the victim D's head, but there is no time to see the head of the defendant's head due to drinking.

In addition, the victim F did not intentionally assault the victim F in the process of shaking the arms that the defendant tried to cut off.

The judgment of the court below which convicted each of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in misconception of facts.

B. Even if the Defendant was found guilty of an unreasonable sentencing test, the lower court’s sentencing (fine 1,500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

가. 사실오인 주장에 대하여 원심에서 적법하게 채택하여 조사한 증거들에 의하여 인정되는 다음의 사정, 즉 피해자 D는 경찰 출동 단계에서부터 피고인이 자신의 다리를 발로 찼을 뿐 아니라 주먹으로 머리를 때렸다고 일관되게 진술하고 있고 피해자 F도 일관되게 주먹으로 맞고 발로 차였다고 진술하고 있는바, 피해자들의 상해부위를 볼 때 이들의 진술에 신빙성이 있는 점, 피해자 D가 단순히 시비만 거는 피고인의 머리를 먼저 물건으로 내리쳤다고 보기 어려운 점 등을 감안하면, 피고인이 피해자 D의 다리 및 머리 부위를 먼저 폭행하여 상해를 가하였고 피해자 F을 폭행하였음을 넉넉히 인정할 수 있다.

We affirm the lower court’s conviction of each of the charges of this case.

B. In full view of the following factors: (a) the Defendant could have been punished for the same offense; (b) the victims have not agreed with the victim; and (c) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct; (d) the motive and circumstances leading to each of the instant crimes; and (e) the circumstances before and after the instant crime, etc., various sentencing conditions as shown in the argument.