All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In misunderstanding of facts (the defendants) Defendant A: (a) obsting the victim’s 3 persons driving alone at the time of the commission of the victim, and the Defendants expressed the desire to drive away from the victim’s rear scam and damaged the victim’s rear scam; (b) she was faced with the face and face when the victim was faced with the victim’s chest and face due to drinking and head; and (c) she was able to see the victim’s breath and her face when the victim was faced with the victim’s chest and face; and (d) she was able to b

In addition, Defendant B only made a fighting between the victim and the Defendant, and did not have been at the time of the victim’s buck. However, the lower court recognized that the Defendants jointly committed an assault like the facts charged and inflicted an injury on the victim on the grounds of the victim’s statement, which is difficult to believe because it was contrary to the victim’s testimony by G, a police officer, who was dispatched to the scene after receiving the victim’s report on F or on the same day, was in violation of the rules of evidence.

B. Legal principles (Defendant A) even if Defendant A committed an act of cutting down and pushing ahead of the victim’s bat, etc. against the victim’s violence, such act is an act to avoid one’s damage caused by the other party’s violence and is socially reasonable.

C. The sentencing of the lower court (Defendant A: a fine of KRW 1 million, Defendant B: a fine of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. On May 12, 2012, the record reveals that: (a) around 02:50 on May 12, 2012, the Defendants 3,4 young male at the I parking lot located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and 20 minutes of a match with each other, such as being pushed down with vision as a main issue; and (b) the victim E (Korean students) working as a cook at the headline of the “J” located in the above place where the victims had worked on the day and discovered the damage of the victim’s vehicle after the completion of their service; and (c) from the surrounding person, the Defendants were set off.