A. The Defendant of mistake of facts is only a fact that his body flags and flags were flaged by the victim while flabing flags from the victim, and did not commit an assault by the victim as stated in the judgment of the court below. The judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case and affected the conclusion of the judgment by misconception

B. The lower court’s sentencing (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. (1) With respect to the assertion of mistake of facts, the degree of formation of a conviction for finding a guilty guilty in a criminal trial should be such that there is no reasonable doubt, but to the extent that it excludes all possible doubts, and rejection of evidence that is recognized as having probative value is beyond the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence.

Therefore, the credibility of a witness's statement is not arbitrarily denied solely on the ground that the witness's statement is not somewhat consistent with the statement concerning other minor matters, if it is consistent in the main part of the statement.

(2) In the case of this case, based on the above legal principles, the court below's duly adopted and examined evidence is based on the following circumstances. (1) The victim specifically stated the major matters of the crime of this case, such as the relationship with the defendant from the investigative agency to the court below, the reason and circumstance leading up to the defendant's assault, the method of assault, and the circumstances after assault, etc., and judged that the statement is consistent as a whole and that the contents of the statement itself are only acceptable. (2) The victim continued to have suffered damage without paying the borrowed money.