2. The judgment of the court below revealed the following facts based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, i.e., (i) the victim was provided medical treatment to the I Hospital on July 1, 2014, which was the day of the crime of this case; (ii) the victim was issued a written diagnosis after being diagnosed on the right-hand high-speed, high-speed, high-speed salt, and on the left-hand surface on July 2, 2014, and (iii) the victim was in dispute with the victim from the time of the police investigation to the trial of the party; and (iv) the victim was in dispute with the victim as of the day of this case and lost his memory while the victim lost his mind through a mixed termination of the body of the victim; and (v) the victim was able to see the body of the victim with the end of the opposite part of his stick, and was above the next part.

The defendant's assertion is asserting that it is difficult to believe it as it is because the defendant's above argument is not a specific net memory without any particular reason, and ③ The victim continues to display the defendant's stick even after being pushed the defendant's stick to prevent it, and the defendant and the stick were in the shape of carrying one another.

In full view of not only the above statement of the injured party, but also the credibility of the statement in accordance with the above circumstances asserted by the defendant, the defendant can sufficiently recognize the fact that the injured party inflicted bodily injury on the injured party by neglecting the injured party by stick, so the judgment of the court below contains an error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts as pointed out by the defendant.

shall not be deemed to exist.

3. According to the conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.