A. The misunderstanding of the facts and the legal principles stated in the court below that although the defendant's head was scambling by being scambling one time due to beer's head in the court below's judgment, the defendant's wife was not significant.

The court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case, since the victim did not receive treatment separately after the victim was living a normal life, and the victim's wife did not constitute "injury" in the crime of injury. Thus, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and misunderstanding of the legal principles.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles 1) The injury of the relevant legal doctrine refers to the injury of the victim’s completeness or physiological function.

In light of the above legal principles, the health class and the following circumstances recognized by the court below as lawful and investigated by the court below, it is reasonable to determine that the injured party's wife suffered from the Defendant's assault constitutes "a special injury" in light of the above legal principles, since it is based on the premise that the injured party's wife is equal to the injured party's wife who could normally occur in his daily life even though there is no assault (see Supreme Court Decisions 91Do1832, Oct. 2, 1991; 205Do1039, May 26, 2005; 2005Do1039, May 26, 2005). Thus, the judgment of the court below is justified, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding facts or by misapprehending legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

(1) The victim who is the defendant is under the influence of alcohol.