All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of the instant case, Defendant A 1 had the victim assaulted the Defendant A first, and had the Defendant B and the victim take drinking. The Defendant A only had the enemy fluencing it again, but there was no fact that Defendant A fenced the victim or inflicted an injury on the victim.

2) The sentence of the lower court (an amount of KRW 3 million) that is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (unfair sentencing)’s punishment (an amount of KRW 3 million) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Article 2(2) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act provides that the so-called "two or more persons jointly make a statement about the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts" requires that there exists a so-called co-offender relationship between them, and that several persons are required to recognize the crimes committed by another person on the same opportunity at the same place and commit a crime using the same opportunity (see Supreme Court Decision 95Do1642, Feb. 23, 1996, etc.). Accordingly, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, namely, ① the victim has consistently made a statement to the effect that "the victim was injured by the defendant A while he was injured by the defendant B," since the investigative agency and the court of the court of the court below, even if the victim did not make a concrete statement about the type of the defendant's participation in the investigation, it does not appear to deny the defendant's participation in the judgment of the court below when the victim and the defendant were assaulted by the defendant A and the victim, and the victim continuedd the defendant B's testimony.