A. In light of the background and degree of the instant assault by misunderstanding the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, circumstances before and after the assault, etc., the Defendant could have sufficiently predicted that the result of the victim’s death may occur due to his own assault, but the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, on the ground that the Defendant was not likely to have predicted the victim’s death

B. The sentence of the lower court’s sentence (two years of suspended sentence in the month of imprisonment with prison labor, two years of suspended sentence, etc.) against an unfair defendant is unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) On the assertion of misunderstanding the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the lower court’s determination is based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, and comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances as revealed in the record, even if the causal relationship between the Defendant’s assault and the victim’s death is acknowledged, the Defendant’s act of causing the death of the victim to “influence of acute heart wound,” which is the heart disease, is an exceptional consequence, and it is ordinarily difficult for the general public to anticipate the result of the victim’s death. As such, there was a possibility that the Defendant could have predicted

It is difficult to see it.

① At the time of the Defendant’s assault, the victim suffered from her Hemical heart disease (high level scopic scopic scopism, heart non-scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopics).