Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty on the ground of mistake of facts.

2. The evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the following circumstances that can be recognized by the court below: ① The victim consistently testified from the investigative agency to the court of the court below that he was assaulted by the defendant three times in the face floor; ② The victim’s Ma, who was at the site of this case, also stated to the same effect in the court of the court of the court below; ② there is no special circumstance to suspect the credibility of the statement; ② the victim reported 112 immediately after this case, and the police stated that the snow and the ice were ice about the degree of damage when he was investigated; ③ the victim filed an emergency room at the night of this case with the emergency room, complained of the co part, complaining of the pain part, and conducted a CT test more detailed than the next day, ④ The doctor in charge cannot find the defendant’s injury with the diagnosis and attachment of the victim’s body, and thus, the victim’s allegation in this case’s charge cannot be acknowledged by considering the following facts.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.