A. The Defendant did not commit an injury by assaulting the victim as stated in the facts charged.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby finding the Defendant guilty of the facts charged.

B. In light of the circumstances leading to the instant crime of unfair sentencing, etc., the lower court’s sentence imposing a fine of KRW 500,000 is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The statement of the victim on the assertion of mistake of facts is consistent with the contents of the victim’s statement at the investigative agency to the court of the court below, and at the time, G was at the same time to the court of the court below, stating in the court of the court below that “I am on the first day, “I am satise tobacco why the victim would be satise,” one and one of the Defendants (the defendant and co-defendant B) was satched with fighting. There was one other among the Defendants, and one of the Defendants was satched, and the one was satched, but the other was satched, but the other was satched.” In the police, the police stated that “I am satch with D and the victim was satched, and was used as the victim was satched by satise in a narrow space, and then B (Co-defendant B) was satisfyd with the victim’s statements in the floor level of credibility.”

In full view of the above statements by the court below and the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant inflicted bodily injury on the victim as determined by the court below.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the instant injury is just and there is a ground for appeal.