A. The judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case, even though he did not have any physical contact with the victim and the victim outside of the guard room by opening a door to the apartment guard room at around the time when the facts charged of this case were recorded, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (2 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant also asserted the same as above.

In regard to this, the court below acknowledged the fact that the defendant inflicted an injury on the victim as stated in the facts charged in this case, according to the consistent statement and the diagnosis of injury in the investigation agency of the victim and witness E and in the court of the court below, while the witness's statement in the court below as shown in the defendant's argument is difficult to recognize credibility in light of the contents and attitude of the

In view of the facts charged of this case, the lower court convicted the Defendant.

2) Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below in close comparison with the above circumstances acknowledged by the court below, the above judgment of the court below is justified, and there is no violation of law by mistake of facts as alleged by the defendant.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake is rejected.

B. As to the wrongful assertion of sentencing, the sentencing is based on the statutory penalty, and the discretionary determination is made within a reasonable and appropriate scope, taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing as prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act.

However, considering the unique area of sentencing of the first instance court that is respected under the principle of trial priority and the principle of directness taken by our criminal litigation law, and the ex post facto core character of the appellate court, we consider the conditions of sentencing in the first instance sentencing trial process and the sentencing criteria.