The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. According to the statements of the victim of mistake of facts and witness J, even though it can be recognized that Defendant B participated in the crime of bodily injury of Defendant A and inflicted joint bodily injury on the victim, the court below's decision that did not recognize the defendants' joint injury is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on Defendant A (limited to eight months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and one hundred and twenty hours of community service) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. On June 21, 2014, at around 00:30 on June 21, 2014, Defendant A made a decision on the assertion of mistake of facts. The summary of the facts charged was that Defendant A, in the male toilet of the E third floor in Namyang-si, “I am hyp, hyp,” without any reason, “I am hyp, hyp, hyp, hyp, hyp, hyp, hyp, hyp, hyp, hyp, hyp, hyp, hyp, hyp, hyp, hyp, hyp, hyp, hyp, etc.” The court below found Defendant B guilty on the ground that Defendant B’s testimony and hyp, hyp, hyp, hyp, hyp, hyp, etc. was not proven.

3) In a case where the appellate court considers that there exists a ground for appeal, it is a principle that the credibility of the testimony can be determined by the entry of the protocol alone without re-examination of the witness examined by the first instance court.