Defendant

B All appeals against the Defendant A by the Prosecutor and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B did not want the victim as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment below, and only resisted the victim with good horses.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged against the Defendant, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. In light of the fact that Defendant A’s prosecutor (hereinafter “Defendant A”) found the victim’s failure to find in the classroom together with Defendant A’s mother, and the victim made a consistent statement as to the insult of Defendant A, etc., the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged against the above Defendant, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following facts: (a) the relationship between the Defendants and the victims recognized based on the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the Defendant B’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts; (b) the process of the Defendants’ finding the victims at the time of the instant case; (c) the circumstance at the time of the instant crime and the fact that Defendant B consistently testified the victim’s insult from the investigation agency to the trial court; and (d) the witness E statements to the purport that it conforms to the above victim’s statement, the Defendant can sufficiently recognize the fact of insulting the victim as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the court below; and thus,

B. The lower court’s determination on the prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of facts (as to Defendant A) is difficult to recognize the credibility of the victim’s statement in the court of the lower court and the investigative agency, which corresponds to the facts charged in this case against Defendant A

In light of the above, this case against Defendant A.