(a) misunderstanding of facts (the part concerning the punishment of violence, etc. (a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act) (1) The defendant has not inflicted a bodily injury on the victim due to the death of a glass wave, which is taken in place.

(2) The victim did not first state whether he was injured in the police investigation, and did not submit a diagnosis, and the police did not find any injury to the victim at the scene of crime.

However, it is difficult to believe that the victim argued that he was injured in the police call, and that he reversed his statement on the background and side of the injury.

③ Also, there is no witness’s statement about the fact that the defendant injured the victim, and the photograph of the victim’s face was sent back to the police later after the case, and the credibility thereof is low.

(4) Even if it is recognized that the victim was injured by the defendant, the defendant had no intention to inflict the injury.

B. The lower court’s sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the following circumstances, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant, including the credibility in the victim's statement, and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, he can sufficiently recognize the fact that the glass wave was inflicted on the victim by cutting the victim's buck with the victim's breater on August 18, 2014.

Furthermore, in light of the circumstances leading up to the defendant's act of inflicting bodily injury on the victim, and the part and degree of injury, it is recognized that the defendant had the intention of inflicting bodily injury on the victim.

1 The victim made a statement that "no special credit is available" at the first police investigation on the day of the crime, but "the defendant is dead, etc.".