Even if such circumstance alone does not constitute grounds for appeal as alleged in the statement.

(2) In light of the above legal principles, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the grounds of unfair sentencing on the grounds of appeal on the grounds of appeal, and thereby exceeding the bounds of the legal principles on the grounds of appeal. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the grounds of appeal, as otherwise alleged in the ground of appeal, and thereby exceeding the bounds of the legal principles on the grounds of appeal, as otherwise alleged in the ground of appeal.

A. In determining the facts, the Defendant, without the intention of assaulting the victim, was faced by the victim’s physical disease due to the wind of the victim’s head, and the injury did not occur. Therefore, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, which found the establishment of the crime of injury.

B. Although the Defendant made the same remarks as the facts charged, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine that recognized the establishment of the offense of insult, since the Defendant’s act was not recognized as a performance or did not contravene the social norms.

2. Determination

A. 1 The Defendant alleged that he had a physical disease faced with the victim’s head by chance during the process of shaking the physical disease. However, in light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the records of this case, and the following circumstances recognized by the records of this case, the Defendant was the victim’s head at the victim’s will.