The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) the Defendant, upon D’s request, provided advice on the preparation of a contract for transfer and takeover of rights at the place where the instant crime was committed; and (b) did not recognize or anticipate the act of mutual conflict, such as D, or participated in the act of mutual conflict.

2. "At least two persons under Article 2 (2) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act" requires that two or more persons have a so-called co-offender relationship between them, and that there are cases where several persons are aware of another person's crime in the same opportunity at the same place, and used it to commit a crime.

(2) On February 25, 200, the court below held that: (a) the Defendant, based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, became a coffee shop, which is the place where the instant crime was committed; (b) the Defendant, at the oral store operated by the victim, took the form of right transfer contract, the register of real estate register, the building register, and the building register to transfer the rights to the F, such as deposit money of the oral store operated by the victim to the F; and (c) at the time of intimidation, the Defendant was able to take a bath to the victim; and (d) at the time of intimidation, the Defendant was able to take advantage of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant was able to take advantage of the right transfer contract form, the register of real estate register, the building register, and other necessary documents, such as the lease deposit money of the oral store operated by the victim to F; and (e) the Defendant was able to take advantage of the content of the instant contract, and (d) the victim was able to take advantage of the victim.