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

1. According to the evidence relevant to the summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error), the fact that the Defendants jointly inflicted injury on the victim is sufficiently recognized.

Nevertheless, the court below acquitted the Defendants, and there is an error of misunderstanding of facts.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in this case is that Defendant B is a lessee of the “E” store located in Macheon-si and sub-leaseed to the victim F (e.g., age 60), and Defendant B is the seat of Defendant B.

Defendant

B terminated the lease relationship with the lessor of the said “E” store, and as the victim removed from the said store, the Defendant B and the victim suffered the loss on whom the ownership of the goods in the said store belongs.

On January 2, 2013, at around 17:49, the Defendants reported the victim’s leaving the said store to take away goods located in the said store from the said store and prevented them from taking them out on board the sprinking, and then, Defendant A was in favor of the victim’s head, and Defendant B took part in the head debt of the victim, and Defendant B took part in the head debt of the victim and took the face of the victim’s head at one time.

As a result, the Defendants jointly inflicted an injury on the scopical base that requires approximately two weeks of treatment on the victim.

B. The lower court rendered a judgment that acquitted the Defendants on the ground that the victim F, G, and H’s statements are difficult to believe, the remainder of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize the instant facts charged, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

C. The evidence as shown in the facts charged of this case 1 is the victim F’s investigative agency and the court below’s testimony, witness G, H’s investigative agency and the court below’s each statement.