A. Although there was a fact that there was a problem of calculating the drinking value between the defendant and the victim of mistake of facts, the defendant did not assault the victim.

At the time of the instant case, the drinking house owner reported that he would accept the agreement from the victim who is an employee, and the victim made a statement at the investigative agency as if he was abused by the Defendant.

Therefore, the lower court found the Defendant to have abused the victim.

B. The sentence of an unreasonable sentencing (the fine of KRW 500,000) of the lower court is too heavy.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated in the lower court’s determination of the assertion of mistake of facts: ① the victim stated that the Defendant was assaulted by the Defendant on one occasion in City expenses due to the following problems, ② no special circumstance exists to deem that the victim had made a false statement of assault during self-harm; ③ the Defendant also recognized the fact that there was a trial expense due to the drinking value with the victim at the time of the instant case, the fact that the Defendant used the victim as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the lower judgment can be recognized, and the above assertion by the Defendant is without merit.

B. In full view of the following factors: (a) the Defendant had a criminal record on the assertion of unfair sentencing; (b) the Defendant has not been agreed with the victim; (c) the Defendant denies and does not oppose the Defendant; and (d) the Defendant’s background of the instant crime; and (e) the Defendant’s age and character and conduct, the sentence of the lower court

The defendant's above assertion is without merit.

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