A. There is no fact that the Defendant did not assault the victim C, and there is no fact that the Defendant assaulted the police officer.

B. The sentencing of the first instance court of unfair sentencing (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the first instance court as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts is not accepted, since the Defendant, by her hand, has committed an assault against the victim C by leaving the victim C at the time of her hair, and received a report, and sufficiently recognized the fact of assaulting the Defendant by walking the head of the police officer E to arrest the Defendant in the act of committing an offense.

B. In full view of the motive and background of the Defendant committed the instant crime, method of committing the instant crime, degree of damage, circumstances after the Defendant committed the instant crime, and the fact that the Defendant again committed the instant crime during the period of repeated crime despite several times of force, and other various circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing as indicated in the record, such as the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, family relationship, physical and mental health condition, etc., the sentencing of the first instance court against the Defendant seems to be too unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion on

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since the defendant's appeal is without merit.