The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

A. The Defendant of mistake of facts is not a person who did not display or threaten the atmosphere, or carried with him to threaten.

Nevertheless, the court below found all of the charges of this case guilty, and the judgment of the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of suspension of execution in six months of imprisonment, probation, and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case at around 12:30 on May 18, 2013, the Defendant expressed the hacker atmosphere (30cm in length) which is a dangerous object while returning to the suspect’s investigation from the D Public Notice Hostel room located in Seocho-gu Seoul, Seoul, as a assault case, at the Criminal Service of the Seoul Coast Guard and the Criminal Three Team Affairs Office, and returned to the suspect’s investigation at the Seoul Coast Guard and the Victim E, and expressed the victim’s desire to “drawer, as it would be, her, her, her, her, her, her, her, her, her, and her, her life at this house.” The Defendant expressed the hacker atmosphere three to four times in the direction of the victim’s face.

In this respect, the defendant carried dangerous objects and assaulted the victim.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged by integrating the evidence presented in its judgment.

C. Since the investigation agency, the Defendant consistently denied the instant facts charged, and the evidence that comply with or seem to comply with the instant facts charged is E and F’s statements.

First, according to the E’s statement, the prosecutorial investigation stated that the defendant was 3,4 times in the direction of face, as the defendant was able to stand, and that the defendant was 3,4 times in his face at the court below (No. 138 of the investigation record) that the defendant was satisfing in his face 3,4 times in the direction of his face.

(No. 69 of the trial record). On the other hand, in the first police investigation, E refers to the defendant's seat while avoiding disturbance.