A. Fact-misunderstanding (as to the point of injury) that the defendant abuseds the victim; however, the victim's injury was only caused by a separate assault case that the defendant had committed prior to the assault, not by the victim due to the assault by the defendant.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one hundred months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s judgment as to the assertion of mistake of facts and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by this court, the Defendant may be recognized as having inflicted an injury by assaulting the victim as stated in this part of the facts charged. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts is without merit.

1) The Defendant, from the investigative agency to the court of this case, was at the time of the victim’s left side at the time of this case, at the time of the victim’s loss.

and the victim was also subject to the above violence from the defendant in the investigative agency.

However, the victim stated that the court below and this court met with the other side of the defendant, not the kylblock, with the other side of the defendant.

However, the statement made by the victim at an investigative agency seems to be more accurate as the victim’s memory on the day of the instant case, the statement is likely to have been contaminated due to the close relationship between the Defendant and the victim, and the Defendant also recognized the fact at the time of the victim’s clock. 2) In light of the fact that the victim’s statement made at an investigative agency was recognized, the victim’s statement was credibility. 2) The Defendant had been sleepd due to the

However, the victim stated that he did not receive medical treatment after the occurrence of the above separate assault case, and the above separate assault case was at the beginning of 2016, and at considerable intervals between this case and this case.