A. The Defendant did not say to the victim that “I will not cut off the vehicle directly to the customers and me har h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h.

B. The Defendant’s hand did not contact the victim’s hand.

Even if the Defendant’s grandchildren contact the victim’s body, this is merely a contact with the Defendant’s fingers of the victim’s chest during the process of making the Defendant look at the victim’s body to another place, and thus, it is difficult to view the chests as the Defendant’s fingers.

In addition, even if the defendant assaulted the victim, it is a legitimate act that speaks against B and the victim's fighting.

2. Determination

A. Determination 1 on the assertion that the Defendant did not make a statement as stated in the facts charged) the Defendant did not make a statement as described in the facts charged at the trial, and even if such statement was made, it does not constitute an assault even. (2) However, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the trial, i.e., the Defendant consistently stated that the Defendant had made the same statement as indicated in the facts charged from the investigative agency to the court of the lower trial, and the Defendant and the victim have conflicted before the instant case, it is difficult to deem that it is difficult to believe the victim’s testimony merely because it is difficult to believe that the Defendant made a statement as described in the facts charged.

3. Meanwhile, the words of the defendant, as stated in the facts charged, are only indicated to clearly indicate the motive and circumstances leading to the crime, and the summary of the crime of this case is that "B 2 times the victim's chest due to drinking, and the victim's finger by combining them.