The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal (1) as to U’s joint violence part against U, according to U’s statement, the defendant was at the time of head in U’s rear side, and (2) as to the joint injury part of T, even though the defendant did not directly have a victim, even though he did not have a victim, he did not escape by taking part in and participating in a threatening speech and behavior by recognizing that he inflicted an injury on T, thereby preventing T from escape. (3) As long as the defendant jointly assaulted with A and B and inflicted an injury on T, it is reasonable to view that the defendant jointly destroyed Ma in the process, such as a drasium, etc., but the judgment of the court below acquitted all of these facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The court below consistently denied the charges from the investigative agency to the court of the court below, i.e., the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., (i) the defendant consistently denies the charges from the investigative agency to the court of the court of the court below; (ii) the police and the court of the court of the court below consistently stated that “the defendant was in a group A or B, but there was no physical contact,” (iii) the witness V of the court below stated that the defendant was not in direct pricing; (iv) the witness of the court of the court below stated that “I would not know how the defendant was in a correct way against the defendant; and (v) the defendant could not be ruled that the defendant was in violence with A and B; and (v) the witness’s statement of the court of the court below is not specific as to the part of the defendant’s participation; and (v) it is difficult to believe that the defendant’s statement was contrary to the victim’s statement as well as the victim’s statement.