A. misunderstanding of facts: The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the crime of assault among the facts charged in this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, although the defendant did not assault the victim E by sculing coffee and drinking sculing him.

B. The lower court’s sentencing (one million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, in particular the police of victim E and witness E and witness F, and each statement in the court of original instance, etc., the defendant can sufficiently recognize the fact that the defendant abusedd the victim E by sculing coffee and drinking sculing it as stated in the facts charged. Thus, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is without merit.

B. Although the degree of damage and assault in this case on the assertion of unfair sentencing is relatively minor, the defendant can still have the power to be punished for the same kind of crime, the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive and background leading to the crime of this case, method and consequence of the crime of this case, and the sentencing conditions as shown in the records and arguments, such as the circumstances before and after the crime, are considered as being too unreasonable. Thus, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act as it is without merit. Since it is obvious that "the second floor" in paragraph (2) of the criminal facts stated in the judgment below is a clerical error of "the first floor", the defendant's appeal is dismissed ex officio under Article 25 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure