Defendant

All appeals filed by A and the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A1) misunderstanding of facts in the judgment of the court below: (a) although there was a fact that the Defendant solely inflicted an injury on the victim at the date and place specified in paragraph (1) of the crime as stated in the judgment of the court below, there was no fact that the Defendant inflicted an injury on the victim in collaboration with those who have failed to obtain the name, thereby causing an injury

B. Prosecutor 1) misunderstanding of facts (hereinafter “Defendant B”) the victim’s statement that she was assaulted by four male persons including Defendant A and B is consistent, and Defendant A also made a statement that she inflicted injury on the victim jointly with Defendant B on the date of the first instance trial of the investigative agency and the lower court. Therefore, it is reasonable to deem that Defendant B inflicted injury on the victim jointly with Defendant A. Nevertheless, the lower court’s judgment that acquitted Defendant B on the ground that there was an error of misconception of facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. 2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (as against Defendant A) is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. 1) Unless there are exceptional cases where it is deemed that maintaining the first instance court's decision on the credibility of the statement made by the witness at the first instance court of the first instance is remarkably unfair, the appellate court should not reverse without permission the first instance court's decision on the credibility of the statement made by the witness at the first instance court just because the first instance court's decision on the credibility of the statement made by the witness at the first instance court is different from the appellate court's decision (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Do4994, Nov. 24, 2006). 2) The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court's decision on the assertion of mistake of facts by Defendant A and the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the trial court, namely, (i) the witness K testified testified that he returned to the victim as soon as he was present at the time when he was present at the F Park with the first person who was present at the F Park.