A. Of the facts charged in the instant case of mistake of facts, the Defendant alleged a mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles as to insult in the grounds of appeal, but withdrawn this part of the allegation on the first trial date.

As to the point of issue, the defendant did not inflict any bodily injury, such as breaking the victim's baby, as stated in the facts charged.

Nevertheless, the court below convicted the defendant by misunderstanding the facts.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of 2.5 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the following circumstances are acknowledged by the court below. ① The victim, from the investigative agency to the court of the court of the court below, i.e., (i) the victim was able to take the victim’s head debt at the time and place stated in the facts charged, and (ii) the witness H and I’s statement in the court of the court below clearly and consistently consistent with the victim’s aforementioned statements, (iii) each statement in the court of the court below after the victim’s investigative agency was consistent with the victim’s aforementioned statements, but considering the fact that the victim was able to take care of his head debt at the time and place until the court of the court of the court below, and that the victim was able to take care of it, and that the victim was able to take care of his head debt, and that the victim was able to take care of it, and thus, the credibility of witness statement in the court below’s statement is clearly denied solely on the ground that there was a difference between the victim’s testimony and its limits.