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

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor against Defendant A, the court below found Defendant B guilty of this part of the facts charged on the ground that it is insufficient to recognize that the victim knew that he had been aware of the fact that he had committed a crime of attempted attack by Defendant B, according to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor against Defendant A, even though he was found to have been guilty of metal blades used by Defendant A. Therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

Therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby affecting the conclusion of judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence against Defendant A (one year of imprisonment with prison labor for six months and one year of suspended execution) is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Examining the judgment of the court below on the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles in comparison with the records, the court below, based on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, used a metal knife inspection by Defendant A.

It is sufficiently acceptable to determine that Defendant B was insufficient to recognize that Defendant A aided and abetted the crime, and there is no error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles alleged by the prosecutor.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

B. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court’s judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, we examine the following.