A. The defendant of mistake of facts is merely the consent of the victim to walk, and there is no injury in need of medical treatment for about six weeks.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court found the victim guilty of the facts charged in this case by comprehensively taking account of the evidence as indicated in the judgment of the lower court. 2) The written diagnosis submitted by the victim of the crime of injury was generally identified based on the victim’s statement, and the part and degree of the injury observed and judged by using medical professional knowledge, and it is insufficient to be evidence to directly prove the fact that the injury as described therein was caused by the Defendant’s criminal act. However, if the date and time when the written diagnosis of the injury was conducted is close to the point and time when the injury occurred, and the degree of the injury alleged by the victim is consistent with the cause and circumstance of the injury alleged by the victim, the lower court did not lawfully visit the hospital as well as the evidence of the Defendant’s injury, and thus, it cannot be rejected by the Defendant without any reasonable ground. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 24260, Dec. 17, 2017>