A. misunderstanding of facts, the Defendant did not display the victim a view to the Defendant in a state of trial due to the victim’s threatening driving, and did not display the victim a glass by putting the driver’s seat window on the window, raising the window of the driver’s seat.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby finding the Defendant guilty of the facts charged.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of 500,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The victim stated that the victim of the assertion of misunderstanding of facts was at the time of the defendant, while closing the window in order to see a part of the window of the vehicle, and that the defendant was unsatisfing so far the window in the hands floor, while the defendant stated that the defendant was unsatisfing the window in the hands floor, the defendant was not able to display his hand on the part of the victim, and that the window was placed twice in the hands floor with the indication that the window should be satisfed.

According to a photograph of the victim's driver's seat, the victim's statement is consistent with the victim's statement that the defendant was able to know the victim's window that the victim's window was cut off by her hands, as if the victim's window was taken by her two hands, the victim's window was cut off by her hands. Thus, the victim's statement is credibility, while the defendant seems to have made a statement by reducing her behavior at the time, it is difficult to believe it as it is.

In full view of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below including the statements of the victim, the charges of this case are found guilty.

Defendant’s assertion is not accepted.

B. Although the degree of assault on the instant crime is relatively minor, it is not agreed with the victim, as well as the conditions for sentencing under Article 51 of the Criminal Act.