However, since the court below recognized the defendant as a crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint assault), the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, ① the victim has consistently and specifically stated in the investigative agency from the defendant to the court of the court below regarding the background and form of the assaulted by the defendant, and ② The police agency found the defendant and the victim to be lightly sealed while fighting each other.

The Defendant stated as “,” and (3) the Defendant asserted that fighting between B and the victim was fighting, but this case occurred between the Defendant and the victim on the ground that the initial victim took an illegal field photograph of the Defendant’s parking site, and the Defendant appears to have taken the place to report that the Defendant and the victim were able to take a bath at the office. In light of the circumstances of the above case, considering the following, the Defendant’s above assertion by the Defendant is difficult to accept, the Defendant assaulted the victim as stated in the facts charged.

The judgment of the court below which determined the person is just and acceptable, and there is no error of law by mistake of facts as alleged by the defendant.

3. In conclusion, 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. It is so decided as per Disposition.