A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, the period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

A. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. In full view of the consistent statements made by the victim knife on the knife cited by the defendant by the prosecutor, and the fact that the victim's statement can be seen as a benife upper part according to the upper part of the body, it can be recognized that the defendant has knife the part of the victim's knife, and the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of this part of the charges is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

Although the prosecutor stated in the petition of appeal the grounds for appeal of “unfair sentencing”, the prosecutor did not make an oral statement on the grounds for appeal of unfair sentencing in addition to mistake of facts at the first trial date of the first trial. The prosecutor’s improper assertion of sentencing is not determined separately (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do11696, Dec. 10, 2015). 2.

A. On June 25, 2016, the summary of this part of the facts charged in this part of the prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of facts is as follows: (a) around 07:30 on June 25, 2016, the Defendant took the Defendant’s knife and resisted the knife cited by the injured person at the victim’s house in order to set off and resist the Defendant’s knife, which is a dangerous object cited by the victim’s left knife part of the victim’s left knife one-time medical treatment.

The lower court determined that the victim’s statement that seems to correspond to the facts charged is difficult to believe and the evidence presented by the prosecutor, including this, was insufficient to recognize this part of the facts charged, by comprehensively taking account of the various circumstances as set forth in its reasoning, which were duly admitted and investigated by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the

In light of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the court below's decision is just and it is erroneous in the misapprehension of the facts alleged by the prosecutor.