A. Although the defendant misunderstanding the facts did assault the victim E's chest, he did not injure the victim as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment below.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The upper part of the victim suffered by misunderstanding the legal doctrine is naturally able to recover, and does not constitute injury under Article 257 of the Criminal Act.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on “injury” and thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, contrary to what is alleged in the facts charged.

(c)

The punishment sentenced by the court below which is unfair in sentencing (300,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., the victim suffered bodily injury from assaulting the defendant from the investigative agency to the court of the court below.

In addition to the facts of the crime in the judgment below, when considering the following facts: (a) the statement on the process of the occurrence of the case and the situation before and after it is relatively consistent and concrete; (b) the "scarcitys of the scarke wall, the scarcity and the tension of the scarcity" among the injury suffered by the victim can sufficiently occur only with the above act recognized by the defendant; and (c) the date of issuance of a medical certificate on the injury of the victim was July 14, 2016, which is the day of the crime in this case; and (b) the photograph of the injured part of the victim taken on the same day is also in accordance with the above medical certificate and the statement of the victim, it is possible to fully recognize the fact that the defendant inflicted the injury on the victim, such as the facts of the crime in the judgment below,

B. Judgment on the misapprehension of the legal doctrine 1) relevant legal doctrine.