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. In full view of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the defendant can sufficiently recognize the facts that the defendant inflicted an injury by assaulting the victim as stated in the judgment below. Thus, the above argument by the defendant is without merit.

The victim was put in place at the investigative agency as a matter of parking management by the defendant, but the defendant was threatened with the danger of the victim as he sawd with the fruit that he saw while taking a bath, and he was unable to take the knife with the victim's knife. After which, while carrying out a serious bath, the defendant made a statement that he was snife of the knife of the victim's knife with his hand.

B. He observed the instant crime in telephone conversations with an investigative agency: (a) the Defendant and the victim were in conflict with each other; (b) the Defendant took his knife his knife at a different place; and (c) thereafter, the Defendant and the victim did not seem to have faced with the Defendant and the victim when she was in line with each other, but he continued to have fighting by getting the victim go beyond the Defendant.

H has made not only statements about the contents of assault against the victim's defendant, but also detailed statements about the dispute between the defendant and the victim, which are credibility in the statement.

C. E, the same as the Defendant, is a stib (CCTV) screen in the management office at the time of the instant case at the lower court’s trial.