2. The following circumstances that can be acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court and the lower court, namely, the victim and the police at the lower court, namely, that “the Defendant was found to the office of the victim on March 19, 2017 and did not pay transport expenses,” and the victim fightd one another outside the office, while taking the body outside the office, and bating the Defendant’s breath, and the victim was faced with the head of the victim with the cargo fat.

“Along with the specific and consistent statement (30 pages of evidence, 81 page of the trial record), and the content of the statement are particularly unreasonable parts or statements in itself, and it can sufficiently be reliable as there is no inconsistency in the contents of the statement, and F, at the police and the lower court on March 19, 2017, the Defendant was faced with the wheels of the victim F, by threatening the victim.

“The Defendant laid down a bridge with the victim’s breath.”

In full view of the facts stated in the facts constituting a crime in the judgment below, the Defendant’s statements are consistent with the victim’s statements. The Defendant, as stated in the facts constituting a crime in the judgment of the court below, may recognize the fact that the Defendant was faced with the wheels of the freight trucking from the victim’s head.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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.