All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

All the costs of the lawsuit by the original instance and the party shall be borne by the Defendants.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A(1) only made a mistake of fact-finding B, and did not assault C as stated in the facts charged in the instant case. (2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (fine 1,000,000) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (1) misunderstanding of facts does not have any fact when the Defendant was shouldered by C. However, although there was a fact that the Defendant was pushed down with C, this constitutes self-defense or legitimate act as an act to prevent C from harming C, and thus, the illegality is excluded. (2) The sentence of the lower court on unreasonable sentencing (fine 1,000,000) is too unreasonable.

C. Defendant C1) misunderstanding of facts does not have any misunderstanding of facts that the Defendant was either at the time of or was not guilty. However, although there was a tension with the Defendant’s arms, it is reasonable that the Defendant’s act constitutes a justifiable act as an act to attach B to the scene of the crime to which the Defendant’s wife was committed. 2) The lower court’s punishment (fine 1,000,000) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

Defendant

D1) In fact, the Defendant did not commit violence against A or harming B’s face. However, even though there was a fact that the Defendant’s purchase was fluorted, it constitutes a justifiable act as an act to attach B to the criminal scene to the Defendant’s parent, and thus, constitutes a justifiable act. 2) The sentence of the lower court on unreasonable sentencing (fine 1,00,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendants’ assertion of misunderstanding of facts as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts was examined together with the Defendants’ assertion of misunderstanding of facts, and the Defendants also asserted the same purport as the aforementioned assertion of misunderstanding of facts, and the lower court rejected all the above assertion based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated, and convicted all

The following circumstances revealed by the above evidence, namely, the Defendants are consistent with co-defendants who are the other party to the fighting from the police investigation stage to the court.