A. misunderstanding of facts (not guilty part) E and F consistently stated from the police to the court of the court below that E did not live in the shape of the defendant, and the defendant stated that E was placed in a 8th head from the time the video was taken within the office of this case, 1 time the video was taken, and 3 times outside the office of this case before the video was taken, but this is inconsistent with or inconsistent with the result of verification of video, F, and G testimony, and because E was highly larger than the defendant, and it was impossible to receive E from the defendant outside of the office of this case. The court below held that it was probable that E was suffering in the upper part of the defendant's body due to the part of E during the packaging outside of the office of this case, but the court below found the defendant not guilty of the defendant's injury because it did not affect the conclusion of the judgment, in light of all the circumstances that the defendant was found guilty of all the facts charged.

B. In light of the overall circumstances of the instant case of unfair sentencing, the sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (such as a fine of three million won) is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts in comparison with the record and closely, the lower court’s decision that acquitted the Defendant on the ground that this part of the facts charged constitutes a case where there is no proof of crime, based on the circumstances in its reasoning, is just and acceptable, and even if not due to the part of E’s title, the Defendant’s wife by the head, etc. of E.