A. In regard to the mistake of the fact (the charge of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (the driver's assault, etc.), the Defendant did not assault the victim's Z which is a taxi driver in operation.

B. The sentencing of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one year and two months of imprisonment and fine of 300,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the circumstances stated in its reasoning, the lower court determined as to the assertion of mistake of the facts, and determined that the Defendant sufficiently recognized the facts of assaulting the victim Z, who is the driver of the taxi in operation as described in paragraph (2) of the crime, by taking the head into his/her hand over one time, etc.

The decision was determined.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning of the lower court in comparison with the evidence examined, the lower court’s finding and determination of the above facts are justifiable, and it did not err by misapprehending the facts, thereby adversely affecting the judgment

B. The Defendant committed seven times the crime of interference with the duties of interfering with the business by finding a breath while drunkly in companies, restaurants, etc. operated by local residents.

Defendant has been punished several times, including imprisonment with prison labor for violent crimes, and committed each of the crimes of this case during the period of repeated crimes.

The victims did not agree with the victims.

In full view of the following circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the offense, means and consequence, etc., and the fact that there is no special circumstance or circumstance to change the sentencing of the lower court after the lower judgment, the lower court’s sentencing is not unfair.

3. The Defendant’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, on the grounds that the appeal is groundless.