However, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous as a matter of law.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, namely, ① the victim from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court determined that “the Defendant’s parking of the goods in a parking-prohibited area should not continue to take away the goods.”

In this regard, the defendant was able to catch and trace the flaps.

In full view of the fact that “the victim has consistently stated the fact of damage,” ② there is no special motive or circumstance to make a false statement in order for the victim to gather the defendant, ③ there is no discovery of any particular circumstance to suspect the credibility of the above statement, ③ according to CCTV images, the fact that the defendant used to assault the victim as stated in the judgment of the court below is sufficiently recognized, in full view of the following: (a) the fact that the victim has committed assaulted the victim, as described in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the court below, is confirmed to protruding up the left hand, and the form that the victim is pushed back

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case without the explanation of its reasoning is just in its conclusion and there is a violation of law by mistake of facts as alleged by the defendant.

subsection (b) of this section.

Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

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