A. The Defendant, misunderstanding of facts, did not have any physical contact with the victim at the time and place indicated in the facts charged of the instant case, and did not commit an injury by assaulting the victim.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (an amount of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) As to the argument of mistake of facts, the lower court asserted the same as the grounds for appeal in this part, and the lower court stated to the effect that: (a) the following facts or circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated under the title “determination on the Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion”; (b) the victim was subject to assault by others as to the cause of injury; (c) the part and degree of injury as stated in the injury diagnosis document prepared at the time corresponds to the contents of the assault and injury alleged by the victim; (b) the victim was subject to investigation by the police witness on the same day; and (c) the reason why the victim was subject to assault by the Defendant; (d) the method and form of assault; (e) the method and circumstances of assault; and (e) the circumstances after the assault; and (e) the witness’s statement on the circumstances after the assault were consistent with this; and (e) the victim was unable to have any other circumstances to be found to have been subject to punishment from the Defendant or the victim; and (e) the circumstance that the victim was aware of the victim’s credibility of the victim’s statement.