Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

A. In fact, the Defendant, while asking the victim to spawn, did not dump the victim’s arms, but did not flap the victim’s arms or sell them by drinking.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (an amount of KRW 700,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio, if the confession of the defendant is the only evidence against the defendant, it shall not be admitted as evidence of guilt. Thus, in a case where the court found the defendant guilty on the basis of the confession of the defendant without any supporting evidence, it shall be deemed that there was an error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment in itself (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do7835, Nov. 29, 2007).

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in violation of Article 310 of the Criminal Procedure Act, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The part concerning the assertion of mistake of fact, however, despite the above fact-finding decision, the defendant's assertion of mistake of fact is still subject to the judgment of this court.

In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant committed an assault against the victim.

There is no illegality of misconception of the facts pointed out by the defendant in the original judgment.

The victim consistently made the following statements in the police and the court of the trial.

- The victim distributed a leaflet in front of the exit 1, which was anticipated to be locked on the front wall of the exit. However, the Defendant, who was intending to enter the exit above, she saw the victim as “finite.”