A. The Defendant, as stated in the lower judgment, did not inflict an injury on the victim as stated in the facts charged.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The judgment of the court below on the assertion of facts is consistent with the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, ① the victim stated in the investigative agency that “the defendant was flicking and pushed down his flat at a canter, was flating and pushed off his flat at a canter, and was pushed down with the entire face with the hand floor.” The victim also supported the CCTV image flating, and ② according to the victim’s death diagnosis certificate, the victim’s “satisfing and flat at the inside and outside of the canter,” and the victim’s statement to the effect that “the victim’s flat was flatd and flated,” and the victim’s statement to the effect that “the victim’s flat was flatd and flated,” and the victim’s statement to the effect that “the victim’s flat was satd with the victim’s statement of this case.”

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of facts is without merit.

B. The degree of injury of the instant case to be judged on the unfair argument of sentencing is not severe, and the Defendant agreed with the victim in a unanimous agreement with the victim that the victimized person does not want the punishment of the Defendant, and the Defendant does not have any criminal record exceeding the fine, etc. are favorable circumstances.

However, the defendant did not object to his mistake while denying the crime of this case for the first time.