The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the summary of the grounds for appeal (one year and six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment defendant did not have any history of criminal punishment in the Republic of Korea, and seems to have committed the instant crime under the influence of alcohol at the time, probly and provokingly, and the defendant did not want to punish the victim I by mutual consent, deposit a considerable amount of money for the recovery of damage to the victim H, and repented and reflected his/her mistake, etc. are favorable to the defendant.

However, the Defendant, along with C et al., inflicted injury on the victim H by making two times the head part of the victim H with plastic with the victim s, and did not good quality of the crime by making a verbal female shotbrow on the left side part of the victim I, which is a dangerous object. Although the amount of damage suffered by the victims due to the instant crime is reasonable, the Defendant denied his criminal act during the investigation process and recognized the facts of the crime only when the victim was confirmed on the CCTV screen at the time of the investigation process, and all other sentencing conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, environment, character and conduct, are considered as being too unreasonable. Thus, the Defendant’s above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

[However, in the application of the laws and regulations of the court below, each "Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc." is clear that it is a clerical error in each "former Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (amended by Act No. 12896, Dec. 30, 2014)". Thus, each ex officio correction is made pursuant to Article 25 (1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.