All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the fact-finding witness) and each statement made at F and the police station of the victim G may be reliable by the initial statement. According to this, even if the facts of Defendant B’s assaulted G and the facts of assaulting the victims, Defendant B was acquitted of the facts charged in violation of the Punishment of Violence, etc. Act (joint assault), and the judgment of the court below which dismissed Defendant A’s public prosecution is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

2. Determination:

A. On January 4, 2012, around 06:00, the Defendants were suffering from physical contact, such as the Defendant B’s drinking alcohol in the package of “E” in Seo-gu Daejeon, Daejeon. Defendant B continued to have the face of the Victim H with the victim’s face at the back seat, and Defendant B went back to the victim’s male and female appearance G. Defendant B, one of the Defendant B, was faced with the face. Defendant B, who was working outside of the package, was faced with the victim G, and she was flick with the victim H (26 years old) who was working in the part of the victim G, and was flick with the victim H (26 years old), and was flick with the victim’s face, and continued to take the face of the victim and the victim’s face with his hand.

Accordingly, the Defendants jointly committed each assault against the victim G and the victim H.

B. The judgment of the court below on Defendant B stated to the effect that with respect to Defendant B’s assaulting act against Defendant B, F reversed the statement that “B was frightened by Defendant B,” and “B was frightened by the police that he was frightened with G’s clothes.” The court stated to the effect that “B was frighted by Defendant B, while G was on the right side of B’s right side.” G was frightened by the police that “b was frightened by Defendant B,” and that “B was frighted with G’s clothes.”