All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Although examining the grounds for appeal by Defendant B based on relevant legal principles and evidence, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the facts against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the scope of recognition of a crime of assault and the defense of a political party or legitimate act, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal in the lower judgment, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

In addition, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for more than ten years is imposed, an appeal may be filed on the grounds of unfair sentencing. As such, in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the defendant, the argument that the sentence is unfair because it is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal

2. Although examining the grounds for appeal by Defendant C and A based on relevant legal principles and evidence, the lower court’s judgment that found Defendant C and A guilty of facts constituting an offense in the first instance judgment on the grounds stated in its reasoning did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on justifiable acts, contrary to what is alleged in

In addition, Defendant C committed an act described in the facts charged around May 2014, and around April 2014, and the victims filed a complaint on July 14, 2015, which was six months after the date of filing a complaint subject to victim’s complaint. As such, the lower court dismissed the instant public prosecution based on an unlawful complaint.

I asserts that it should be the case.

However, for reasons indicated in its reasoning, Defendant C committed an insult on March 8, 2015, and Defendant A on April 22, 2015.

As alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the rules of logic and experience, and on the premise that the date of the crime is another date than the date recognized by the lower court, the Defendants’ assertion that the victims’ complaint is unlawful is not acceptable.

3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.