A. The Defendant does not have a misunderstanding of facts against the victim’s losses.

B. In light of the legal principles, even if the Defendant was faced with the victim’s grandchildren during the process of spreading the victim, this constitutes only a simple and negligent act, and is not an intentional assault.

In addition, since it is difficult to face simple difficulties that occurred in the process of avoiding illegal collection by victims at the time, the illegality is excluded due to legitimate acts or self-defense.

C. The lower court’s sentencing (one million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below. ① The victim made a concrete statement on the principal facts of the crime of this case, such as the reason why the victim was injured by the defendant at the time from the investigation agency to the court below, the method, and the following circumstances; ② The victim was diagnosed by the X-ray inspection, etc. on the following day of the occurrence of this case, such as the Plaintiff’s satise and satise satise satise satise satise satise satise and satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise satise sat.