폭행등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the victim merely expressed an act different from the facts in mind in mind, and submitted as evidence a recording recording of the act different from the facts and a false statement of diagnosis of bodily injury, and the defendant did not commit violence or bodily injury to the victim. Therefore, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in matters of law
2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court based on evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, i.e., ① the victim stated at an investigative agency to the lower court that the victim was assault or injured as stated in the facts charged; ② the recording at the time of assault on February 23, 2017, the Defendant continues to speak “A” to the victim; as the Defendant and the victim were far from the cell phone where the recording function was operated, the size of the horse is small (from the door to the door), and the victim’s name was refused, and the victim’s name was provokinged, and the victim’s name was provokinged, and the victim’s name was provokinged, and the victim’s name was provokinged from the victim’s body. According to such circumstances, the victim’s fighting in the process of setting the victim’s body to the extent that the victim’s body was exposed to the victim’s fighting, and the Defendant’s statement was made on the victim’s body.