A. Error of facts and misapprehension of legal principles are not prices of the victim’s hair with beer, which is a dangerous object, such as the facts charged in the instant case, but rather prices the victim’s hair and drinking, and the victim’s wife suffered from the instant case cannot be deemed as “injury” as provided for in the special injury crime, by taking such factors as minor treatment to the extent that natural therapy is possible.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case. In so doing, it erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (six months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution, community service, 120 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. The following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the court below's argument of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles were duly adopted and investigated by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below. ① The victim consistently stated that there was a dispute between the investigative agency and the defendant during the process of drinking alcohol to the court below, and the defendant was at the time of the victim. ② The cell phone of the defendant and the victim was taken with beer and beer and beerer, ② the defendant's form was recorded, ③ the victim was reported to the defendant, ③ the victim complained of 119 and reported 119, ③ the victim was issued a medical certificate of injury that requires two-time treatment under the name of "damage of head's unknown damage." ④ The victim submitted a photograph (in the investigation record, 48 pages) of the victim's head in order to explain the victim's head to the court below. The victim submitted the victim's head to the victim's head on the 19th day of the report and the victim's head on the 19th day of the report.