A. The Defendant, by soliciting the victim to talk with the lower court to get on the elevator, did not commit an act of breaking the victim's body, with the victim's body knife and damaging the victim's body.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts charged or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence of an unreasonable sentencing (a fine of KRW 300,000) imposed on the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) The Defendant asserted the same purport in the judgment of the court below, and the court below found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged by employing the victim B’s legal statement in the court below as the main evidence. 2) The judgment of the court below is justified in light of the following facts and circumstances recognized by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is without merit. The written statement prepared by the police on the day of the instant case by the victim stated that “the Defendant started to go against the Defendant’s body while trying to go beyond the body.” On October 8, 2019, the police officer stated that “the Defendant was satisfying the victim’s left arms at the victim’s port, and the Defendant was satisfying with the victim’s left arms at a canter and satch, and the victim’s legal statement in the court below was satisfy over the victim’s left side.”

On the other hand, the police interrogation protocol of the defendant against the defendant was "the defendant was sent back to the victim, and the defendant was forced to get math elevator and the defendant was on board the elevator first and the victim did not get the elevator to get the elevator to get the elevator on board the elevator.