A. As to the injury, which is the primary charge of the prosecutor(s) and the primary charge, there is an error in the judgment of the court below that acquitted the defendant on the primary charge on the ground that the defendant did not have the intention of the injury, although it can be sufficiently predicted that the defendant might suffer the injury by booming the victim in a boomed situation where the defendant was in a room, and thus it is possible to recognize the defendant's intention to injure

B. Defendant (in fact-finding, misunderstanding of facts) 1 did not assault the victim, but there was an error of misunderstanding of facts in finding the Defendant’s assault. 2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (in 1.5 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. On December 17, 2012, at least 17:00 on December 17:0, 2012, the Defendant: (a) received money from the victim D; (b) had the victim go over knee knee knee kne kne ke kne ke kne ke knee ke knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee knee kne, which requires approximately 8 weeks of medical treatment; and (c) the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the primary facts charged on the ground that it was difficult to readily conclude that the Defendant committed the above act with the victim’s intent of injury.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is reasonable.