A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

The judgment of not guilty on the defendant's grounds.

A. In fact, the Defendant misunderstanding (in relation to a crime of special bodily injury), although there was a fact that the Defendant inflicted an injury upon the victim’s snow, the Defendant did not use news lux in the process.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. At around 22:00 on May 29, 2017, the Defendant: (a) committed an assault on the street in front of the Seoul Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government for the following reasons: (b) on the ground that the Defendant was at the time in front of the street, and the Defendant took three beer diseases with the wall, and continuously carried three beer diseases with the wall to E; and (c) made an assault on the sidewalk, which is a dangerous object on the front side of the flower, by cutting off the front eye of E, one time, with the sidewalk, which is a news report block, a dangerous object on the front side of the flower; and (d) took part in E, such as walking the body of E, and caused injury to E, such as the right side and the mouth, which requires approximately eight weeks of treatment.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of special injury as evidence with respect to the Defendant’s partial legal statements, E’s investigative agency and legal statements, diagnosis reports, and medical records.

The Defendant consistently recognized the background and parts of the injury from the investigative agency to the court, but denied the fact that the Defendant inflicted an injury on the victim by using the sidewalk.

In light of the following circumstances based on evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below and the court below, it is difficult to believe that the E investigation agency and the court below's legal statement that the defendant used news juths are all reliable, and the remainder of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize the fact that the defendant's news juths are used. Thus, the court below's judgment convicting the defendant of this part of the facts charged is erroneous, which affected the conclusion of

① The E consistently stated to the effect that “the Defendant was frightened by using bricks” from the investigative agency to the court of the court below.

(b).