A. Fact misunderstanding 1) The Defendant, while drinking with the victim C, was sexually maternityed from the above victim and sent the above victim to the home, did not have intention to commit assault.

2) Fraud and assault against the victim F, the Defendant: (a) the victim F requires the victim F to have his singing room and drinking value prepaid; (b) the victim F did not have the drinking value.

Since the above victims have been pushed out of the singing room, there was no intention of fraud or assault.

3) The criminal defendant against the victim I tried to pay the alcohol value with a debit card. However, since the balance of the account was not paid due to lack of the balance, and the subsequent payment was made in full, there was no intention of fraud.

4) The Defendant who interfered with the performance of special official duties was merely a police officer who did not have a satisfy in speaking as a speech, and did not have a intent to commit violence against the police officer. Therefore, there was no intention to interfere with the performance of special official duties.

B. In light of the following circumstances: (a) the punishment of the lower court (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable, in light of the reflectivity of the unfair criminal defendant; (b) mental division; (c) interference with the division of labor; and (d) agreement with the victims of fraud, etc., the punishment of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake as to each fact, according to evidence such as the Defendant’s statement in the lower court on the part of the assault against the victim C, the prosecutor’s interrogation protocol against the Defendant, and the police statement protocol of the Defendant C, the Defendant may be found to have committed an intentional assault in light of the nature and form of the assault, the relationship with the victim, etc.

Mably recognized.

This part of the defendant's assertion is not accepted.

2) The Defendant’s legal statement and the Defendant’s assault against the victim F in the lower judgment.