A. Error of facts (the crime of conflict No. 2 No. 1 of the annexed crime list No. 2 at the time of sale) The Defendant did not have any fact at the H restaurant operated by the victim G, as shown in the annexed crime list No. 1 of the annexed crime list No. 2 of the judgment. Even if she did so, she did not take a bath to the victim G and did not destroy the glass window.

Therefore, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged despite the fact that the Defendant did not attack the victim G.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (two months of imprisonment and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. Comprehensively taking account of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the court below's duly adopted and investigated evidence, the victim G's statement is consistent, and its credibility is found in accordance with the defendant's partial statement. Accordingly, the court below's judgment convicting the defendant of this part of the facts charged is just, and the defendant's allegation in this part is without merit, since it is not erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and affected the conclusion of the judgment as pointed out by the defendant.

① At the time of investigation by the police, the victim G stated that “I am for one person on September 13, 2013, after the Defendant drinked with 12 p.m. and am for drinking without giving the drinking value, I broken off glass windows so that I would no longer sell the drinking,” and (the Defendant) “I am for any method at the time of her taking a bath” in question “I am for the same year as her he did not am for drinking and do not make a report to ordinary people,” and “I am for the same time.”