2. The following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below: ① the victim stated to the effect that “at the time of the trial of the court below, the victim was scambling himself and shoulder; ② the witness G and F made a statement to the same purport at the time of the court below’s witness G and F, the victim’s husband at the time of the case; ② the defendant and I continued dispute between L and the victim’s husband at the time of the case; ② the appraisal had been scamed; and the victim was scambling. The defendant also appeared to have committed the assault, such as scambing the victim’s shoulder by participating in the dispute; ③ the defendant was aware of the charge of injury during the trial of the court below; ③ the defendant denied the charge of assault during the trial of the court below, but recognized the facts of the crime of assault of this case, which is the changed facts, the defendant’s assertion is not justified.

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.

[However, Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act in the application of the laws and regulations in the holding of the court below are clear that the phrase “Article 70(1) and 69(2) of the former Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 12575, May 14, 2014)” is a clerical error in Article 70 and Article 69(2) of the former Criminal Act. Thus, it shall be corrected ex officio pursuant