A. In fact-finding, the Defendant did not have exercised the same tangible power as stated in the facts charged, and there is no causal relationship between the Defendant’s act and the victim’s injury.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one million won of fine, two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) In determining the credibility of a statement made by a victim, etc. supporting the facts charged, the court below determined that the defendant's allegation in this part of the charges in this case should not be dismissed without any other reliable evidence that can be objectively deemed objectively and objectively, and objectively, if the statement made by the witness, including the victim, conforms to the facts charged, is consistent with the rationality, logic, and morality of the contents of the statement itself or the rule of experience, or is consistent with the witness evidence or a third party's statement, and that the witness's appearance, attitude, and penance of the statement made in the open court after being sworn before the judge, and that the witness's statement made in the witness examination protocol is hard to be recorded in the witness examination protocol, such as the witness's appearance, attitude, and penance of the statement made in the witness examination protocol made in the presence of the judge, and that the defendant's allegation in this part of the charges in this case should not be dismissed (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2012Do2631, Jun. 28, 2015>

In addition to the circumstances properly explained by the court below, the following facts or circumstances acknowledged in accordance with the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., victim's investigative agency and court testimony by the court below, are consistent, specific and reasonable, and the victim's statement by the court below is reasonable.