A. In fact, the defendant did not have asymn the victims and did harm to the victims, but the court below found the victims guilty of the facts charged in this case. The court below erred in the misapprehension of facts.

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

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances, which were duly adopted and examined by the court below to determine the assertion of mistake of fact, i.e., victim D and E suffered injury from the Defendant in an investigative agency and the court of the court below, as stated in the judgment of the court below.

The fact that the defendant consistently stated, and ② there is a fact that the victims are closely involved in fighting with the victims.

(3) According to the fact-finding with regard to the Gwangju Regional Headquarters of the National Health Insurance Corporation, the victims can be sufficiently recognized as having inflicted injury upon the victims by considering the following facts: (a) the victims may not have received medical treatment at any hospital prior to about 10 months prior to the date of the occurrence of the instant case; and (b) the victims shall not be deemed as the Defendant’s act, contrary to the Defendant’s assertion. Accordingly, this part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

B. It is recognized that the Defendant committed the instant crime in the course of fighting the victims and the Defendant suffered bodily injury.

However, in light of the fact that the Defendant again committed the instant crime even if there were several criminal convictions for the same kind of crime, the victim is two and the degree of injury of the victim D is not less than that of the victim, and other conditions of sentencing specified in the pleadings of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, sex and environment, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.