A. Regarding the part not guilty of facts, the court below rejected the victim's statements and the credibility of relevant evidence without reasonable grounds and found the defendant not guilty as to the defendant's attempted attack against the victim N, attempted attack and attack against the victim L, and damaged property.

Therefore, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the judgment.

B. In relation to the illegal conviction of sentencing, the sentence (7 million won in penalty) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination:

A. As to the assertion of mistake of fact, the lower court rendered a not-guilty verdict on the part of the instant facts charged, each attempted attack, and the damaged property, while explaining in detail the grounds for determination thereof.

Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below in light of the record, the evidence alone submitted by the prosecutor was proved to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt about this part of the facts charged.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged cannot be seen as having erred by mistake as alleged by the public prosecutor.

shall not be deemed to exist.

B. As to the wrongful assertion of sentencing, the following circumstances are considered: (a) the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for a period of one year and six months due to a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group, deadly weapon, etc.) in 2011; (b) the Defendant committed the instant bodily injury, non-licensed driving; (c) the instant crime during the period of repeated offense; and (d) the Defendant committed the instant crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act during the trial on the said crime.

On the other hand, in the case of the crime of injury, the degree of injury to the victim is relatively minor, and there is no record of punishment for driving without a license for about 20 years after around 1996, and the case of the crime of non-licenseing after the traffic accident.