A. In fact-finding, the Defendant was unilaterally assaulted by the victim, F, and I who committed such assault, and there is no fact that he did not commit such assault.

The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in the instant case.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (700,000 won of a fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances are acknowledged according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court in determining the assertion of mistake of facts.

The victim stated consistently from the investigative agency to the court of the court below that the defendant abused the victim's head debt by putting him/her his/her head debt and her trace.

F also made a statement to the same effect as the victim in the investigative agency and the court below.

At the investigation agency or court of the court below, G, F, and I, which had observed the situation at the time due to the Defendant's daily activity, stated that the Defendant and E, F, and I were pushed with each other in the investigation agency or court of the court below.

On December 7, 2011, the following day of the instant case, the victim was diagnosed as suffering from the luxal salt and the dratal dysium (in the left side, the inner part, the front part, and the left side) in need of approximately two weeks of treatment at the hospital.

According to the images of the victim taken around the time of the instant case, there is a flive flive flive flive flive flive flive flive flive flive flive fl

In full view of the above circumstances, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant has credibility in the victim's statement and the defendant has inflicted an injury by assaulting the victim.

The judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is just, and there is no error of law by mistake.

B. The Defendant has no record of criminal punishment prior to the occurrence of the instant case.

The defendant, who was unable to repay the borrowed money from F, is dissatisfied with the behavior of the victim under the upper limit of appraisal.