A. The parts of pictures, etc. whose detailed whereabouts were unknown by the victims of misunderstanding of facts are extremely minor and thus, without need to treat them, do not constitute a crime of injury or injury resulting from the present building and fire, since there is no impediment to naturally healing and daily life.

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

2. Determination

A. 1) The lower court found the victim guilty of the instant crime on the ground of the Defendant’s confession, etc. on the ground that the result of the victim’s injury was caused by the Defendant’s crime. 2) The injury of the legal doctrine related to the crime of injury refers to the injury of the victim’s physical integrity or physiological function. In light of the legal doctrine as seen below, the injury of the victim’s body is extremely minor and the need for treatment is no obstacle to natural treatment and daily life, and thus, the injury does not constitute the injury of the crime. However, even if there is no assault, it is premised on the same degree as the injury that may normally occur during his daily life. Thus, if the injury occurred due to the victim’s physical integrity or physiological function, it should be determined on the basis of the victim’s age, gender, physical and mental condition, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do9794, Nov. 13, 2008).