A. Although there was no fact that the Defendant, with the intention of assaulting the victim, thrown away a fire extinguisher or inserted with the intent of assault, the lower court accepted the facts charged in this case and convicted the Defendant, and the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (eight months of imprisonment and two years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is just, and there is no error of law of misunderstanding of facts as alleged by the defendant, since the fire extinguisher and the suspect, who are dangerous goods, were released from the victim's office located in the office B located in Gunsan-si, Sinsan-si, and were charged with the victim's back to the victim's back, and the victim's back to the victim's back to the victim, and the defendant got off the victim's back to the victim's back to the victim, and the fact that the defendant threatened the victim with the omission and insertion, which is a dangerous article that can be seen as a loss of the victim's her tampt. 08:40 on September 30, 2010.

B. Although the Defendant agreed with the victim on the assertion of unfair sentencing without conviction, the instant crime was committed by assaulting the victim by throwing away or inserting fire extinguishers and chairs, which are dangerous goods of the Defendant, to the victim, and by threatening the victim by inserting away or inserting them, which are dangerous goods, and considering all the circumstances that are the conditions for sentencing in the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, and circumstances after the crime, the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable, and therefore, the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing is also justified.