A. Although the Defendant did not inflict an injury on the victim, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case. The lower court erred by misapprehending the facts.

B. The sentencing of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances, which are acknowledged by the court below to have comprehensively taken account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below regarding the assertion of mistake of fact: ① The victim, from the investigative agency to the court of the court of the court below, brought a dispute over himself/herself and trees as an issue at the date, time, and place indicated in the facts charged, was sealed by the defendant on his/her right chest.

In light of the fact-finding with regard to the Gwangju veterans hospital of the original court, there is a possibility that the defendant has inflicted bodily injury on the victim, as stated in the judgment of the court below, in light of the following: (a) witness G has consistently made a statement from the investigative agency to the court of original trial; and (b) witness G has consistently made a statement consistent with the above statement from the investigative agency to the court of original trial; and (c) the fact-finding with regard to the Gwangju veterans hospital of the original court, even if he prices blusium one time, there is a possibility that the

B. It is recognized that the Defendant’s judgment on the wrongful argument of sentencing is an initial criminal who has no criminal history.

However, considering the following factors: (a) the degree of injury suffered by the victim is not less severe; (b) the Defendant did not agree with the victim until the time of the trial; and (c) the Defendant’s age, sex and environment; (d) the motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (e) the conditions of sentencing specified in the pleadings of the instant case, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant’s allegation is not reasonable.

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.