All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendants, as to the crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint confinement) as indicated in the judgment of the court below, had been driving by the Gu office in order to mediate a middle and high-class sales contract of the victim D and to transfer ownership. However, the victim unilaterally demanded the revocation of the contract and was made before the cash withdrawal period, and did not detain the victim continuously, disregarding the victim’s demand.

B. The punishment of the lower court (the punishment of Defendant A: the observation of Defendant A’s imprisonment for eight months (two years of suspended sentence) and protection, community service for 160 hours, Defendant B’s imprisonment for ten months (two years of suspended sentence) and observation of protection, and community service for 160 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. Although the appellate court’s determination on the lower court did not have a new objective reason that could affect the formation of a documentary evidence during the trial process, when it intends to re-examine the first instance judgment after re-evaluation of the first instance judgment, there is a reasonable ground to deem that the first instance judgment was clearly erroneous, or that the argument leading to the acknowledgement of facts is considerably unfair due to the violation of logical and empirical rules, etc. Furthermore, without such exceptional circumstance, the lower court’s determination on the facts of the first instance judgment may not be reversed without permission (see Supreme Court Decision 2016Do18031, Mar. 22, 2017). No objective reason exists that may affect the formation of a documentary evidence in the first instance trial based on the foregoing legal doctrine, and it does not appear that the lower court’s maintenance of the judgment is considerably unfair when considering the evidence duly investigated and the content of the lower court’s reasoning compared with the evidence duly examined.

except that the following judgments shall be added:

(b) At the time of further determination, the victim received a 112 report and sent to the site.