A. In full view of the statements of the victim of mistake of facts, the victim's bodily injury photographs, and witnesses who are highly likely to not regard them accurately, it is reasonable to view that the defendant committed violence against the victim due to a sentry.

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant not guilty of the charge of inflicting bodily injury on dangerous articles. The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds that the sentence of unfair sentencing (limited to eight months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, 40 hours of alcohol addiction treatment, and 40 hours of violent therapy) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. On April 22, 2014, at around 19:25, the summary of this part of the facts charged is as follows: (a) the Defendant: (b) around 19:25, at the D restaurant located in Ischeon-si, the victim’s left eyes, which is a dangerous object in the restaurant; and (c) the victim’s eyes, which requires treatment for about three weeks; (b) the lower court determined that the evidence consistent with this part of the facts charged included the victim’s statement in the investigative agency and court; (c) the witness witness witness witness at a close distance to the scene of the instant crime, namely, (d) the victim’s statement that he was going to open the victim’s head after leaving the front door of the bar; and (d) the victim’s statement that he was unable to be considered as the victim’s face; and (d) the victim’s statement that he did not appear as the victim’s face was written in the cement cell.