2. The court below held that the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, ① the victim made a statement from the investigative agency to the court below that the victim suffered bodily injury by putting fat and breathing the victim's fat, ② the contents of the diagnosis statement correspond to the victim's bat at the time, ② E also witness E at the time also stated that the defendant was present at the court of the court below to take bat the victim's bat, ③ On the other hand, F made a statement to the effect that "the defendant tried to bat the victim's batling and fating the victim's bat, but the defendant did not cause any defect in drinking and bating the victim's bat at the time," while F made a statement to the effect that "the victim was bat at the time of 20:0 to 21:00 with the victim's batth, and that it was not clear at the time of committing the crime of this case's bat."

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is just and there is no error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment as pointed out by the defendant.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is without merit and Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act is not reasonable.