Defendant shall be punished by a fine of five million won.

The defendant does not pay the above fine.

A. Although there is a fact that misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (related to the point of violence) have spreaded the arms of the victim, there is no fact that the part of the victim's arms can be recovered due to drinking.

The purpose of the defendant's spreading the arms of the victim is to restrain the victim from bringing about his mobile phone, which constitutes a justifiable act without the intention of assault.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, which erred by misapprehending the facts.

Even if it is recognized that the defendant assaulted the victim, the victim expressed his/her intention that he/she does not want the punishment against the defendant before the judgment of the court of first instance is correct. Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles

B. The sentence of the lower judgment on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (a fine of 6 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. The facts charged of the instant case [Basic Facts] The Defendant found the victim’s residence in order to verify whether the victim had contact with another male in order to verify whether the victim had contact with the victim’s cell phone while continuing the victim’s relationship with the victim’s B (here, 26 years of age).

【Criminal Facts】

1. On June 18, 2019, the Defendant: (a) around 04:35 on June 18, 2019, the Defendant used a cell phone from the victim’s dwelling in Seocho-gu Seoul, Seoul; (b) demanded the victim to return the said cell phone while trying to verify the contents thereof; (c) spread the part of the victim’s arms toward the said cell in his/her hands; and (d) continued to return the part of the victim’s arms to the victim.

Accordingly, the defendant assaulted the victim.

2. The Defendant causing property damage, as described in paragraph (1) and as described in paragraph (1), took place while speaking or disputing the victim’s mobile phone with the victim.