The judgment below

Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B A person shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Defendant

A.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendants 1) Defendant A’s assertion of misunderstanding of the facts did not have predicted the result of the victim’s death, but the lower court found Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case by misunderstanding the facts.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s sentence against the Defendants alleged unfair sentencing (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants by the prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to Defendant A’s assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court’s determination is anticipated that the price for a person’s head may cause a serious obstacle to his/her physical function, and that it may cause a fatal result in a case where he/she causes two brain parts to the extent that the latter would cause a serious loss (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 84Do2183, Dec. 11, 1984). The evidence duly adopted and examined, in particular, the fact that the Defendants prices the parts of the victim’s head sufficiently to the extent that the two parts of the two parts of the two parts of the two parts of the two parts of the two parts of the two parts of the two parts of the two parts of the two parts of the two parts of the two parts of the two parts of the two parts of the two. Accordingly, the Defendants could have predicted that the death of the victim was caused by their assault.

The decision was determined.

2) Examining the above judgment of the court below after comparing it with records, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is an error of law by mistake of facts as alleged by the defendant A.

shall not be deemed to exist.

Therefore, Defendant A’s assertion of mistake is rejected.

B. As to the Defendants and the Prosecutor’s allegation of unfair sentencing, the instant crime committed by the Defendants committed the instant crime by assaulting the victims of the mutual scambling, which occurs during the scambling of alcohol and the victim’s conduct while drinking respectively, and by forceing the victims of the scam.