A. misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles: (a) the wife suffered by the victim does not interfere with daily life even without receiving treatment due to extremely minor and minor circumstances; and (b) the victim’s bodily injury cannot be deemed as an injury to robbery as long as naturally cured upon the passage of the time.

(2) The extent of assault and intimidation by the defendant was not sufficient to suppress the victim's resistance.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of robbery, not simple robbery, as to the facts charged of this case, is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court (a 3 years and 6 months of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the Defendant asserted to the same effect as the grounds for appeal in this part of the lower judgment, and the lower court determined that, in full view of the relevant legal principles and the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, it is reasonable to deem that the injury suffered by the victim constituted the crime of robbery, in full view of the circumstances acknowledged by the relevant legal principles and the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court.

Examining the judgment of the court below closely by comparing it with the records, the judgment of the court below is just, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as alleged by the defendant.

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

② The Defendant alleged to the same effect as the grounds for appeal in this part of the judgment below regarding the degree of assault and intimidation. The lower court also exercised the Defendant, taking account of the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, in the part on the 3th to 12th to 4th 5 of the judgment of the lower court.