The appeal is dismissed.

A. The Defendant, on June 22, 2014, at the D main points located in Daejeon around 05:00 on June 22, 2014, only contests with the victim E, who is the customer of Daejeon, and did not assault the victim.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (fine 2,00,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court consistently stated that the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts: (i) the victim made a reply from the investigative agency to the lower court to the court; (ii) the victim made a motion by causing disturbance to the Defendant while drinking alcohol at the D main point; and (iii) the Defendant bucks with the victim’s statement by consistently taking account of the following circumstances: (i) the Defendant’s desire to do so; and (ii) the F, when drinking together with the victim, did not have any circumstance to doubt the credibility of the statement (Evidence No. 6, No. 36, 37 of the evidence record); and (iii) the lower court’s statement that “the Defendant did not go back to the victim’s seat” was consistent with the victim’s statement in the court of first instance (the trial record No. 41 of the trial record); and (iii) the JJ, who was the Defendant, was aware of the degree of the Defendant’s shocking behavior with the victim (the record No. 52 of the trial record).

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

B. It is reasonable to take into account the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant has no record of having been sentenced to punishment; and (b) the Defendant appears to have caused the instant crime somewhat contingently in the state of decliation due to the problem of the drinking value.

However, the defendant has been punished for the same crime and is not agreed with the victim.