A. The Defendant: (i) was guilty of mistake of facts; (ii) was either sealed the part of the victim D’s chest or was not charged with the victim’s face due to her head; and (iii) was not guilty of assault or bodily injury.

Belgium 2014Kadan8677 was the criminal defendant on his/her responsibility and did not fit the part of the victim E, and did not have the intention of assault or injury.

B. The first instance sentence of unfair sentencing (eight months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the first instance court on the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant’s chest part of the victim D by selling the part of the victim D at one time and the face of the victim D at one time, thereby obstructing the legitimate performance of the victim D’s duties and causing injury, and the intent of assault injury, can be sufficiently recognized.

This part of the defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the first instance court of the crime No. 2014Kadan8677, the Defendant may fully recognize the fact that the booker was placed in the post number E and interfere with the legitimate performance of duties of the victim E and the injury and the intent of the assault injury, as stated in the first instance judgment.

This part of the defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

B. As to the assertion of unfair sentencing, the Defendant does not seem to have any attitude against the Defendant by denying all the crimes.

There is no change in circumstances or circumstances that can be newly considered in sentencing after the judgment of the first instance.

In full view of the details and contents of the crime, the degree and degree of injury, the age, character and conduct, environment and circumstances after the crime, and all the sentencing conditions shown in the arguments, the first instance sentence is too unreasonable.

The defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. Conclusion.