2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, i.e., the defendant himself stated that "the victim took the remaining bath that he did not have a good appraisal (see, e.g., 29 of the investigation record)" (see, e., Articles 76 and 77 of the trial record). The victim E of the court below stated that "the victim E of the witness of the court below stated that "the defendant took the machine behind the defendant," (see, e.g., e., Articles 76 and 77 of the trial record)," and witness G of the court below stated that "the witness G of the court below "the defendant deemed that the defendant was able to take the transmission wind in which the victim is faced" (see, e.g., e., the trial record). the victim was diagnosed by the satum satum and tension that requires treatment for about two weeks prior to the occurrence of the case (see, e., e., see the 7th page of the investigation record).

B. Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.