A. The defendant does not inflict any injury on the victim.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court duly admitted and examined the allegation of misunderstanding of facts as follows: (a) the victim suffered an injury by assaulting the Defendant as stated in the facts charged on the day of the instant case, i.e., the victim suffered the injury.

Comprehensively taking account of the following: (a) the victim consistently stated, the victim was receiving medical treatment at the police hospital on the day of the instant case; (b) the victim filed a complaint against the Defendant on the same day; and (c) the Defendant’s written request for formal trial on September 11, 2017, stating that “the victim was fighting with the victim and suffered bodily injury;” the Defendant inflicted injury on the victim as stated in the facts charged of the instant case.

may be appointed by a person.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of facts is without merit.

B. In full view of the reasons for sentencing indicated in the records of the instant case’s judgment on the unfair argument of sentencing, the lower court appears to have been reasonably determined by fully taking into account all the circumstances, including the various reasons for sentencing alleged by the Defendant, and no special circumstance exists to the extent that the lower court’s punishment is to be changed.

Therefore, the defendant's improper assertion of sentencing is without merit.

3. In 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.