The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The Defendants are not guilty. The summary of the judgment of innocence against the Defendants is published.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. (1) The defendant cannot be found to have committed assault against the victim.

(2) Defendant B had no contact with the victim’s body at the time of the instant case.

B. The misapprehension of the legal principle that the defendants assaulted the victim constitutes a legitimate act to enter a church.

2. The summary of the facts charged is the members of the D church located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, who frequently conflict with the victim E due to the internal division of the church.

On November 18, 2012, at around 10:28, the Defendants: (a) obstructed the Defendants from entering the above church in front of the rear door of the above church; (b) Defendant A scam the victim’s interests with both descendants; and (c) Defendant B scam the victim’s chests twice in both hands.

Accordingly, the Defendants jointly assaulted the victim.

3. The lower court found the Defendants guilty on the following grounds: (i) comprehensively based on the evidence as indicated in its holding, and (ii) based on the determination that the Defendants did not have any other means or methods as to the Defendants’ assertion of justifiable acts, the lower court did not satisfy the requirements of justifiable acts, and (iii) convicted the Defendants.

4. Judgment of the court below

A. (1) Determination of misunderstanding of facts (1) Defendant A's homicide, and the intention or intent of assault in the Criminal Act is sufficient to have the awareness and intent of exercising the physical force of a person. In addition to the facts duly admitted by the court below in light of such legal principles, the defendant's intent of assault against the victim can be recognized. Thus, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

(2) In Defendant B, the exercise of force in the crime of assault under the Criminal Act is sufficient to be caused to a person's body, and it does not necessarily require direct contact to a person. Accordingly, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below.