All of the Prosecutor and the Defendants’ appeals are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A did not have inflicted any injury on Defendant A, such as an abdog, etc., in consideration of Defendant B, and Defendant B’s self-harm, thereby causing such injury.

Nevertheless, the court below erred in finding Defendant A guilty of an injury to Defendant A by misunderstanding the facts.

B. Defendant B did not inflict any injury upon Defendant A and F in collaboration with Defendant B.

Nevertheless, the court below erred in finding Defendant B guilty of the facts charged by misunderstanding the facts.

C. According to the prosecutor's statement, etc. (as to the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint assault)), the fact that the defendant A conspired with F to assault E is recognized.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and not guilty of this part of the facts charged.

2. Determination

A. Although Defendant A alleged that Defendant A had inflicted self-harm on Defendant A, it is difficult to believe that Defendant A’s statement by Defendant A of the Political Party witness I is the father of Defendant A, considering that Defendant A’s statement is the father of Defendant A.

Rather, Defendant B stated in the investigative agency and the court that “Defendant A was faceed once and 4-5 times as head,” respectively.

There is no special circumstance that the above statements are consistent, specific, clear and different in terms of credibility.

In addition, there is also the injury diagnosis letter corresponding thereto and the photograph of Defendant B's body immediately after the occurrence of this case.

In addition, even if Defendant B suffered from chronic infection from this case before this case, and there was a situation that he could have suffered damage to the baby relatively easily due to the shock, it can be recognized that Defendant B suffered from chronic infection due to the physical force exercised by Defendant A more increased the dynamics of Defendant B and suffered injury as stated in its reasoning.