A. The Defendant did not look at the victim of the fact.

The lower court found the Defendant guilty on the sole basis of the testimony of the witnesses without credibility, thereby erroneous in the facts charged.

B. The punishment of the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the following facts and circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court fully recognized that the Defendant committed an assault against the victim on August 22, 2016 and August 23, 2016 respectively.

The judgment of the court below to the same purport is just, and there is no error by mistake of facts.

1) The victim consistently stated in the court below and in the investigative agency as follows.

The defendant is the two titles of the elderly group in the E Park.

The victim was a witness in relation to the past accused's assault case, and the accused will be retaliationed against the victim on his day.

There has been rashing the victims.

On August 22, 2016, the victim was only a house E Park, but the defendant who was drinking was "L" and the victim refused to drink, and the victim was 4 times the face of the victim on his/her hand.

On the next day, the victim was passing ahead of the E Park, but the defendant was at the time of the victim's face with the hand floor.

2) G running an industrial company in the vicinity of the E Park has consistently stated in the lower court’s court and the investigative agency as follows, which conforms to the victim’s statement.

The defendant has been rashing the victim in the case of the two titles of the elderly in the E Park, and in the case of peace.

G was leaving a coffee in E Park at the time of locking, while conducting car painting on August 22, 2016. However, the Defendant considered that the victim’s face was 4 times on the hand floor, i.e., “L dwarf money”.

The defendant is also on the following day.