A. There is no fact that the Defendant administered a mert cancer, such as written in the facts charged.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. It is difficult to see that the time and place of medication of Metephama, the indictment of misunderstanding the legal principles, is too broad and specific, and it is difficult to see that the content of the medication or the method of medication is limited to the subject to the adjudication.

Therefore, it cannot be said that the facts charged in the instant case are specified.

C. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is excessively unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Regarding the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendant and the defense counsel asserted the same purport as the reasons for appeal in the original instance. Regarding this, the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion in detail by explaining the Defendant’s assertion and its judgment in detail under the title of “determination of the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion”. The judgment of the lower court that comprehensively rendered the evidence of its judgment is just and acceptable even in the case of the first instance.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake and misapprehension of legal principles is without merit.

B. As to the assertion that the instant crime was unfair, the Defendant committed the instant crime is deemed to have been punished for the same kind of crime twice in the past, and the Defendant committed the instant crime during the suspension period of execution due to the same kind of crime.

In addition, as a result of the application of the sentencing guidelines by the Supreme Court Sentencing Committee, the recommended punishment for the instant crime is between one year of imprisonment and three years of imprisonment (in consideration of the same criminal records (not more than three years of suspension of execution). The court below shall take into account all the sentencing conditions for the Defendant.