A. Fact-finding is that the victim E attempted to bring about the abolition of the defendant and only obstructed the victim's left arms, and there is no reason to see the victim's left side side.

B. The sentence of the lower court (2 million won in penalty) against an unfair defendant in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The circumstances acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined in the lower court’s judgment as to the assertion of mistake of fact, namely, the victim’s assertion that he/she would have caused the abolition of his/her own goods at the investigative agency and the lower court’s court, and that he/she would have caused the distortion of his/her goods.

A consistent statement is consistently made, and there is no circumstance that makes a false statement to the defendant without mutual understandings, and the victim knew on February 29, 2016, the date of the assault, that he/she received a medical examination and treatment for the reasons why he/she received the medical examination at the expense on February 18, 2016. However, even though he/she was able to receive the medical examination at the expense on February 29, 2016, he/she was found to have found the hospital late due to severe pain, and actually received the medical examination and treatment for the cage at the left side of the left side, and the symptoms were caused by the circumstances unrelated to the instant case.

In light of the fact that there is no finding of the circumstance, it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant used the victim to inflict an injury by assaulting the victim.

The judgment of the court below does not contain any error of law by misunderstanding the facts, and the defendant's above assertion is not accepted.

B. In light of the overall conditions of sentencing, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, etc., the sentence of the lower court cannot be deemed as excessive so long as the sentence is too unreasonable.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit.