(a) In fact, the victim misunderstanding the fact that he saws the bean boom in the defendant's restaurant, it is not possible to enter foreign substances to the extent that he could cause the bean boom because he gets completely melted by mixing the bean and cooking it in a way that he can not cause the bean boom, and smelted foreign substances in the bean boom, other than the victim;

The claimant did not have the victim, and even the victim she saw the victim's breath to the defendant at the time of drinking.

In the absence of any resistance, the victim speaked the bean, and speaked foreign substances to the defendant after the victim speaked the bean.

Even if the port was found, the victim saved the bean saves.

In light of the fact that there is no foreign substance claimed by the Defendant, that the said foreign substance was not submitted as evidence, that the victim received a medical certificate from a dentist who is between the victim and his relative after four days from the date of the occurrence of the instant case, and that the victim did not undergo specific dental treatment, etc., it is difficult to recognize the fact that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone proves that the victim was suffering from the injury of the victim by treating the foreign substance in the breath of the bean, or by treating the foreign substance in the breath of the bean.

Nevertheless, the court below found all of the facts charged of this case guilty. The court below erred by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (an amount of KRW 300,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The court below rejected the above assertion in detail, on the grounds that the Defendant and the defense counsel asserted the mistake of facts are identical to the grounds for appeal in this part of the court below's judgment, and on the grounds that "the judgment on the Defendant's assertion" in the judgment, the court below rejected the above argument

The court below duly adopted and examined the evidence.