2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is that the Defendant, as an infant care teacher of the “C” childcare center located in the Cheongju-si Office B (hereinafter “instant childcare center”), is a D branch.

At around 10:38 on November 16, 2017, the Defendant, in the class D classes of the Child Care Center (hereinafter referred to as the “Child”) around 10:38, in which the Defendant was engaged in lessons with the Defendant, on the ground that the victimized Party E (E) did not observe the order of priority, changed the Stick, put it up on the floor of the victim, let the victim go through, let the victim go through, and let the victim go through, the cell (scar) out of the classroom, and left the school from around 11:23 to 11:23, and excluded the victimized Party from class.

Accordingly, the defendant committed emotional abuse that harms the mental health and development of children.

B. The lower court’s judgment on the following grounds: (a) it is difficult to recognize the fact that the evidence alone, as stated in the judgment of the lower court, presented by the prosecutor in detail and presented by the prosecutor, left the victimized child born from around 10:38 on November 16, 2017 to around 11:23 on the charge of the instant case, and excluded the victimized child from class; and (b) the Defendant’s act alone constitutes “a case where the attitude and attitude of the relevant child’s mind is maintained and that it may interfere with the normal growth of the child, or

In addition, even if it falls under such cases, “the same degree of damage, abandonment or neglect of the child’s body” has reached the same level.