A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles have no intention to assault the victim, and there is no fact that there was no act that can be viewed as violence.

The lower court rendered a judgment of conviction against the Defendant on the ground of the statement of a person who was not a witness directly or did not properly witness the instant case.

Therefore, the court below erred by misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles.

B. The lower court’s sentence of an unreasonable sentencing (three million won by fine) against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. In light of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, it is recognized that the defendant received the victim's shoulder and head as stated in the facts constituting the crime of the court below and caused the victim to suffer injury, and the defendant cannot be said to have no awareness or intent of assault in doing such act.

This part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

1) Both G, F, and E, a witness of the instant case, made a statement consistent with the facts charged in the instant case in the court below’s trial to the effect that “the Defendant assaulted the victim during the dispute with the victim.” In particular, G, F are those who have no relationship with the Defendant or the victim, and there is no reason to make a false statement. 2) He, a son of E, at the time of the police investigation, stated that “h, a witness of the instant case, who was a witness of the instant case, considered the victim’s chest and head, as the victim’s chest at the time of the police investigation (Evidence No. 74 of the evidence record), and refluened it (Evidence No. 74).

3) E submitted to an investigative agency a photograph of the Defendant, stating that “the Defendant abused the victim, and people have affixed the photograph of the Defendant” (which appears to have been taken immediately after the crime was committed on the 71st page of the evidence record.

In order to prevent the defendant from escape, other people are the defendant's seat belt.