The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,00 and by a fine of KRW 500,00.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In so doing, Defendant B did not know of the completion of the commission of the victim’s bodily injury by asking the victim’s arms, and did not have such knowledge and inflicted injury upon the victim by entering the place of the crime.

In other words, the defendants cannot be deemed to have inflicted an injury on the victim jointly, but only the same victims have committed an exclusive crime.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that recognized the defendants as a crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint injury) is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the commonity,

B. Each sentence (Defendant A: a fine of 2 million won, Defendant B: a fine of 1.5 million won) imposed by the lower court on the Defendants is too unreasonable.

2. On May 1, 2018, at around 20:40, Defendant A tried to install CCTVs on the bridge front of the entrance of the third floor of the Diplomatic Association Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, and the pastor E of a church tried to cut down on the front floor of the bridge by cutting down the bridge. Accordingly, Defendant A tried to attach the glass to the church building by using a susbru, and the victim F, a person in charge of the church facility expenses, failed to remove this as soon as the victim F, she would remove the victim’s right arm’s length. Defendant B, who followed the victim’s chest her hand, got the victim over the floor.

As a result, the Defendants jointly committed so that there was no one in the two-day open in order to treat the victim about 2 weeks, and her m, m, m, and so on, the Defendants suffered damage to the reputation of the following arms, which is in detail known.

3. Determination

(a) When two or more persons jointly commit a crime under Article 2 (2) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act means the requirement that there exists a so-called accomplice relationship among several persons, and where several persons are aware of the injury or assault inflicted by different persons on the same opportunity at the same time and inflict an injury or assault by using it;

Supreme Court Decision 60 delivered on June 6, 1986