The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. There was no fact that there was a misunderstanding of facts at the site at the time of the instant case, but there was no violence against the victims as stated in the facts charged.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (2 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. (1) On April 22, 2010, the judgment of the court below on the assertion of mistake of facts regarding the defendant among the facts charged in this case, the defendants et al., who were ordered by Co-Defendant B P in sequential order by the court below, applied Madle-si Madle-si Madle-si (hereinafter "the loan in this case"), applied part of the Madle-si and Madle-si with the Madle-si Dog-si Dog-si Dogs and Dog-si Dogs, and applied the Madle-1st floor bed and Dog-si Dog-ro Dog-ra with the upper Dog-si Dog-si Dog-si Dog-si Dog-si Dog-si Dog-si Dog-do with the upper part of the Madle-do Dog-do Dog-do Dog-do Dog-do.

(2) The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly examining the gist of the part of the judgment below, namely, ① the Defendant et al., upon receiving contact from P and entering the vehicle together with B/O before the AD university, and the Defendant et al. should make up for the persons in the building specifically before the AD university, and actually acted according to P’s instructions, ② W/V accompanied by the Defendant et al.