A. In fact, the Defendant, misunderstanding the fact, did not have a video location D.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (an amount of KRW 3 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

가. 사실 오인 주장에 대한 판단 원심이 적법하게 채택하여 조사한 증거들에 의하면, 피고인이 2016. 8. 4. D의 턱 밑에 라이터를 가까이 대고 켠 사실, D은 2016. 8. 5. G 의원을 방문하여 진료를 받았는데, 당시 타인이 라이터로 턱에 불을 붙였다고 밝힌 사실, 위 의원의 의사는 D이 턱에 경도 (1 도) 의 화상을 입었다고

The facts of diagnosis can be recognized, and according to the above facts of recognition, the defendant can sufficiently recognize that he/she has inflicted pictures on the chin of the chin of Rater D.

B. Although the victim’s injury to the victim’s wrongful assertion of sentencing was not severe, the nature of the crime of this case by the Defendant using the victim’s pictures with Linter is not less severe, and the Defendant had been sentenced four times a fine for violent crimes, and the sentencing conditions indicated in the argument of this case, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, environment, etc., cannot be deemed unfair because the lower court’s punishment is too excessive.

3. According to the conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.