A. Although the Defendant, by using a Handphone, prices the victim’s ear, the Defendant did not see the victim’s face, face, back, etc. due to his/her hand and gate.

B. The sentence of the lower court (an amount of KRW 1.5 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, such as the judgment black images and the victim's testimony of the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the defendant's assertion that there was an error of mistake of facts in the judgment of the court below is without merit, since it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant inflicted bodily injury upon the victim's ear, even in addition to the victim's ear, the defendant's ebbbbbbial and face face.

B. Although the Defendant appears to have an attitude of opposing the Defendant’s wrong judgment on certain acts on the same day, the instant crime was committed by the Defendant at the time of the rapid change of the Defendant’s vehicle line while driving, and the nature of the crime is not somewhat less than that of the Defendant, but rather, there was no agreement with the victim or the recovery of damage.

The defendant has several criminal records of the same kind of violence and criminal punishment.

Considering the above circumstances favorable or unfavorable to the defendant, and the age, sex, environment, and all other conditions of sentencing as shown in the argument of this case, it does not seem that the sentence imposed by the court below against the defendant is too unreasonable.

There is no reason to believe that the above sentencing of the defendant is unfair.

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.