The part of the lower judgment against Defendant B and C, excluding the compensation order, shall be reversed.

1. In a case where an appeal against a judgment of conviction by the appellate court is filed, the confirmation of a compensation order is prevented even without an objection to the compensation order, and the compensation order is transferred to the appellate court along with the accused case (Article 33(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings). The part of the compensation order granted by the Defendants pursuant to Article 33(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings by filing an appeal against the lower court is deemed to have been appealed. However, even if the Defendants and their defense counsel submitted a petition of appeal and the statement of reasons for appeal are not indicated in the judgment below, and even if ex officio examination is conducted, the grounds for revoking or changing the cited portion of

2. Grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court’s punishment against the Defendants (e.g., Defendant A) (e., one year of imprisonment; one year and six months of imprisonment; one year and six months of imprisonment; one year and six months of imprisonment with labor; one year and six months of short term; one year and one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s punishment against the Defendants is too uneasible and unfair.

3. Ex officio determination

A. Of the lower judgment, the Prosecutor added the part on Defendant B’s charges against Defendant B in the appellate trial to the effect that “the Defendant was sentenced to two years of imprisonment with prison labor for an injury committed by the Daejeon District Court on August 22, 2019 and the said judgment became final and conclusive on August 30, 2019” to the part on the criminal records of the facts charged against Defendant B, and filed an application for permission for modification of an indictment to add “Articles 37 and 39(1) of the Criminal Act” to the applicable provisions, and the appellate court was changed to the subject of the judgment by granting permission for modification of an indictment as above.

Therefore, the part of the judgment of the court below against Defendant B cannot be maintained as is.

B. The part of the judgment of the court below against Defendant C is that Defendant C was born on August 13, 2000, and at the time of the pronouncement of the judgment of the court below, Article 2 of the Juvenile Act is “juvenile” as provided by the Juvenile Act.