All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) In relation to the fact-finding of the facts charged in this case of mistake of facts, even though the Defendant conspired with C to commit a crime of bodily injury, but did not appear at the scene at the time of injury to the victim due to dangerous articles C, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case was erroneous. 2) The sentence sentenced by the court below of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court may recognize the fact that the Defendant conspired with C to inflict an injury on D with the camping net, which is a dangerous object.

1) The Defendant and C are the steering staff of the so-called “niveion”, who is a violence organization that is engaged in activities in the Gumi-si, the Gumi-dong, the roof dong, and the human dong area. 2) The victim D expressed that the Defendant walked her face twice at an investigative agency and her walked about about 50 times the right-to-faced body of the victim, and that C used to walk about 50 times the right-to-faced body in the right-to-faced body of the Defendant.

3) At the time of the investigation agency’s investigation, the witness C made a statement to the effect that “A was made at the time when D was made with the Defendant, and thereafter, the Defendant instructed X to treat D by leaving his talk with the Defendant,” and that the Defendant did not leave the scene of the crime. The witness X also made a statement to the effect that “A was made at the time when the Defendant and C got out of the scene of the crime, and the Defendant got out of the scene of the crime, and the witness X was made at the investigative agency, at the time when the Defendant and C got out of the floor of the hand, and she was made under the influence of the vehicle, but he was later going back to the hospital, and there was a fact that the Defendant talked with the hospital by talking that D was going out of the hospital.” However, C and X correspond to the above statement in the court of the lower court.