Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case. The court below erred by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, i.e., (i) Defendant D consistently stated from an investigative agency to the court of the court below that “at the time of the instant case, the Defendant did not commit any harm to the Defendant,” and (ii) Defendant D also stated in the court of the court below that “at the time of the instant case, the Defendant did not assault the Defendant, but did not assault the Defendant,” and that it corresponds to the above statement of Defendant D, the Defendant’s lawsuit, and (iii) the Defendant was injured by assaulted by Defendant D on March 27, 2014; (iv) the date of the instant medical examination and confirmation submitted to the prosecution from 0 days after the date of the instant medical examination to 10 days before the date of the instant accusation; and (v) the date of the instant medical examination and confirmation was sent to 20 days after the date of the instant accusation and the date of the instant medical examination and treatment; and (v) the Defendant did not appear to have been dispatched to the police station from 20 days of the instant case.