The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Considering the fact-finding and misunderstanding of legal principles as follows, the judgment of the court below which found all of the facts charged of this case guilty is erroneous in misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles.

1) The Defendant’s assertion related to the victim D did not have a relationship with the intent to jointly process or mutual use to inflict an injury on the victim E in collaboration with the victim A and C. 2) In relation to the instant crime against the Defendant against the victim E, only a simple injury crime under the Criminal Act is established. (B) The Defendant inflicted an injury on the victim E in the course of defending the victim after being abused first from the victim E, and thus, the illegality as self-defense or legitimate act is dismissed.

B. The lower court’s sentence against the Defendant of unreasonable sentencing (the imprisonment for eight months and two years of suspension of execution, and the community service order 120 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles on the victim D-related assertions 1) Article 2(2) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act requires that two or more persons jointly exist in so-called so-called co-offenders relationship between them. Moreover, it is required that several persons jointly commit a crime by recognizing and using another person's crime in the same opportunity at the same place.

(See Supreme Court Decision 9Do4305 delivered on February 25, 2000, etc.). Further, in relation to an accomplice who is co-processed with a crime by more than two persons, a public offering does not require any legal penalty, but is only a combination of two or more persons to realize a crime by jointly processing and committing a crime. If a public offering is established in a successive or implicit manner, and such a combination of intent is made, a public offering relationship is established. As long as such a public offering is made, a person who does not directly participate in the act of execution is against another co-offender.