1.(a)

The judgment below

Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.

B. Defendant B is punished by imprisonment with prison labor for one year.

(c).

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Defendant

A misunderstanding of facts: The lower court found guilty of each of the facts charged in this case on the grounds as follows.

Defendant

A is not a bossop from the victimJ but merely a bosop from the bottom where he/she was sitting.

There is no fact that only the victim J was pushed down and there was no head debt of the victim J.

Unfair sentencing: The lower court’s imprisonment (one year of imprisonment) against Defendant A is too unreasonable.

Defendant

B: The sentence of the lower court (one year of imprisonment) against Defendant B is too unreasonable.

Defendant

In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the first instance court as to the determination of facts as to the grounds for appeal by A, the Defendant may fully recognize the fact that the Defendant inflicted an injury on the victim J as stated in each of the instant facts charged.

The victim J made a statement at an investigative agency that "the Defendant was faced with the upper part of 1 cm above the right side of the lower part of the Defendant's disease, who was faced with 1 cm above the upper part of the Defendant's body, who was spacking with the right her head, and the victim I also made a statement that "(35 pages of evidence) was her head, and the victim I also her headed with the wind that the Defendant was faced with the wind that "............, later, the Defendant was made a statement to the purport that the Defendant was faced with the lower part of the upper part of the Defendant's body by spicking the lower part of the bridge and her head on the lower part of the body."

(증거기록 47면). 피해자 K 역시 “피고인이 소주병을 들어 퍽 하고 깨뜨렸는데 그 순간 유리 파편이 J의 팔에 튀었고, J은 피고인에게 머리채를 잡힌 뒤 앞뒤로 흔들렸다”는 취지로 일관되게 진술하고 있다

(No. 10 pages of Evidence) The fact that all three victims make a concrete and consistent statement at an investigative agency, and the victims are different from the motive or circumstance in which they make a false statement against the defendant.