2. Determination

A. According to the defendant's statement of mistake of facts (the suspect interrogation protocol of the police) the defendant made a statement to the investigative agency of the defendant [the defendant at the time] but the problem of the progress of construction between the victim and the victim does not reach a mutual coordination rate, and the defendant's own flag was placed in the office because he was unable to suppress him, and the defendant made a written contract at the office, which was next to him, and the victim who was smoking outside the flag at the time of the flag, and the flag's flag was flading, and the defendant said that the flag and the defendant stated that the flag "I will go against the flag," and that "I will not go against the flag." The defendant's act of flaging the victim with "dog", which is a dangerous object, might be a major threat to the victim's life or body at the time of flaging.

Therefore, the lower court did not err in finding the Defendant guilty of these acts.

The part of the statements made by the victim and D does not coincide with each other or is exaggerated due to the violation of the situation at the time (the part of the statement made by the victim is extremely high that it is not consistent with the situation at the time, or that it is highly probable that the part of the statement made by the victim, which was cited together by the victim, was inconsistent with the situation at the time or exaggerated, because the defendant's hand carried out by another hand while putting one hand in the contract at the office at the time.)

Even if the defendant sees his own kys, the defendant saw his own kys.