2. In full view of the following circumstances, injury diagnosis, evidence photograph, etc. revealed by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, the defendant spits or spawns towards the victim C and sufficiently recognizes the fact that the victim D's spawns are spawned. Thus, the above argument by the defendant is without merit.

The victims have consistently and specifically stated the facts of damage from investigative agencies to the court of the court below.

B. On the other hand, the defendant stated that the victim D was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the crime of this case, the victim C was not infected at the time of the examination of the suspect of the police, and that spitation of spits in the vehicle was reversed at the time of the examination of the suspect, and that the victim D, who was unable to drive at all, made a statement that spits into the vehicle, was seated on the driver's seat of the vehicle, and the defendant returned the cell phone and wall from the victim D, and the victim D returned the cell phone and wall to the defendant. However, the victims made a statement that the victim D returned directly to the defendant after the police, and H returned the victim D's cell phone and wall to the victim, and the victim D did not express his memory well at the time of the investigation of the suspect's suspect, in light of the fact that the victim D's spit " ........" and the victim D left the taxi to the victim's vehicle, and the defendant made a statement to the victim's vehicle.