The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendants are not guilty.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendants 1) argues that even though there was no fact that misunderstanding of facts did not inflict injury upon F, the judgment of the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. 2) The Defendants asserted that the punishment of unfair sentencing (a fine of KRW 1 million: a fine of KRW 1 million; and a fine of KRW 700,000) imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B asserts that even if there was a fact that Defendant B was a F’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’ss f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’

2. Determination

A. On July 14, 2013, the summary of the facts charged in the instant case: (a) the Defendants: (b) 18:00 on July 14, 2013; (c) and (d) the Eancian had a horse dispute with the F (65 years of age) at the Eancian conference in which Defendant D D was a wooder; (b) Defendant A, by his hand, took once the F’s arms on the upper part of the F’s wood project owned by the Defendant A; and (c) Defendant B, in order for F to put the F into the Henctor of the wood project; and (d) Defendant A suffered injury, such as the two-way dump sected strokes, for which treatment of approximately 14 days was required.

As a result, the Defendants jointly inflicted an injury on F.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged.

C. The burden of proving the facts charged in a 1-related criminal trial is to be borne by a public prosecutor, and the conviction is to be based on strict evidence with probative value, which makes a judge not to have reasonable doubt that the facts charged are true, insofar as there is no such evidence, even if there is suspicion of guilt against the defendant.