A. The Defendant does not have any misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles regarding the victim’s face and without going through the victim’s body, and there is no support for walking the door door so that it can be damaged.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (fine 5 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the content of the first instance judgment regarding the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, and the evidence examined by the first instance court, if there are special circumstances to deem that the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance was clearly erroneous, or if the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance is not deemed significantly unfair considering the result of the first instance court’s examination and the result of additional examination of evidence not later than the time of closing argument in the appellate court, the appellate court should not reverse the first instance judgment solely on the ground that the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance is different from the appellate court’s determination (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2018Do1748, Jul. 24, 2019). The following facts and circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, i.e., the victim’s face at the time of the victim’s appearance from this court to the date of the first instance examination to the victim’s body.