A. In fact, the Defendant misunderstanding the fact by drawing the victim’s left hand by double hand, and again, did an assault by breaking the breath’s hand or spathing bat, but the lower court convicted the Defendant of the facts charged in this case. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (the penalty amount of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the spirit of substantial direct and psychological principle adopted by the Korean Criminal Procedure Act, the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance court was clearly erroneous in determining the assertion of misunderstanding of facts.

Except in exceptional cases where it is deemed significantly unfair to maintain the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court by taking account of the results of the first instance examination and the results of the further examination of evidence conducted by the time the appellate trial ends, the appellate court shall respect the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Do4994, Nov. 24, 2006, etc.). In full view of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, the victim consistently sought from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court by consistently finding the victim's left hand before the victim's house and by taking in good hand, and again, helps the victim to see the E-house in the same way as the victim's house by scambling him and knicking him.

The victim's statement concerning the process, method, etc. of the crime of this case is considerably specific and natural, and there is no mutual contradiction, and it can be recognized credibility by complying with the legal statement and photograph materials of the witness E of the court below, and there is no additional evidence to dismiss it otherwise.