The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. There is no misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles that Co-defendant A and C participated in or conspired to give the victim's head to be a beer disease.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that recognized the defendant as a co-principal of the crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a violation of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc.) is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts or by misapprehending the legal principles on

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) As to the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, it is sufficient that the intention of the joint process of the relevant law is not necessarily required in advance to the conspiracy of the crime planning, and each accomplice has a trade name that each accomplice would achieve the elements of a crime or share the actions in essence related to the elements of a crime (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do6706, Sept. 11, 2008). In the joint co-offender relation of two or more accomplices who jointly process the crime, it does not require any legal punishment, but is a combination of two or more persons to jointly process a crime and realize the crime. Thus, even if there was no process of the whole conspiracy, if there was a combination of their intentions by either agreement or impliedly, the conspiracy relation is established among several persons, and even if such conspiracy was made, even if the person who did not participate directly in the act, he/she is held liable as a joint principal offender at the time of the crime (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 98Do30, etc., Defendant 202).