A. The Defendant did not assault the victim as stated in the facts charged of this case.

The victim gets dancing of the defendant into a closed-end and led the defendant, and the defendant only gets a passive resistance to avoid being towed.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found D and F guilty of the facts charged in this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. In consideration of various circumstances on the Defendant’s grounds of unfair sentencing, the lower court’s punishment (fine of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, namely, at the time of the instant case, the Defendant distributed the victim's logs entrusted with advertisement management, such as the leaflet of the apartment site of this case, and the victim was aware of it on the part of the victim. At the time of the instant case, the victim stated in the investigative agency that "at the time of the instant case, the Defendant told the Defendant that he would not illegally distribute the leaflets to the Defendant, so he would have the right to do so," and that "the Defendant spits down the face and spacks the face three times." (21,35 pages of the investigation record), witness F also discovered that the Defendant distributed the leaflets without permission and contacted the victim. At the time of the instant case, the victim did not have the right to do so, and the victim's face was spacked first, and the victim's statement and statement are sufficiently consistent with the victim's statement and statement of this case (3-4 times)."