A. The Defendant did not have exercised the tangible power against the victim.

Even if it is recognized that the power has been exercised, since the vehicle door and the body of the victim have been contacted by negligence in the process of closing the vehicle door, there was no intention of assault against the defendant.

B. Even if the facts charged of unfair sentencing are found guilty, the lower court’s sentence (the fine of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court and the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the trial court are: ① the victim has consistently arrived at the scene of this case from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court, and consistently recommended the defendant to move to the side; and the defendant continued to move to the side because the defendant would not move to the scene before the clerical error in the insurance company, while the defendant was recommended to do so, he would be able to open the vehicle door and open to the defendant. However, even though the defendant has continuously closed the vehicle door at the inside of the front door of the vehicle, he stated that the victim was faced two times, such as the vehicle door closed, and the vehicle door closed at the front door of the vehicle. ② The defendant also opened a vehicle door at the investigative agency, so the victim did not have been able to promptly open the front door and open the door by making a statement to the left side of the victim, and there was no other necessary evidence to open the victim's oral examination at the latest.