A. The Defendant, while moving a brick with the victim, was guilty of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles that the victim saw the sound as a hack pipe, and caused a sudden defect by using another hack pipe, and did not inflict an injury on the victim’s left shoulder by using the hack pipe.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The court below found the defendant guilty on the facts charged, considering the evidence duly adopted and examined as well as the following circumstances recognized by the victim's investigation agency on the facts of the crime of this case, namely, the victim's statement from the investigation agency to the court of the court below is consistent, the victim's injury part and degree correspond to it, and the victim stated that "the defendant was hacker from the defendant," and the defendant was on the job after the crime of this case was committed. If the defendant was not at the time when the victim was hacker, the defendant was hacker at the time. If the defendant was not at the time when the victim was hacker, the defendant was hacker at the time when the victim was hacker, or without any special circumstances at the time, he was guilty of the facts charged.

Examining the judgment of the court below closely after comparison with the records, the judgment of the court below is just, and this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit

B. The Korean Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle on the argument of unfair sentencing, has no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing exceeds the reasonable scope of discretion.