A. Prosecutor 1) In light of the victim’s consistent statement and the statement of witness F’s voluntary statement consistent with the victim’s statement in relation to the injury that the lower court rendered not guilty of the reasoning, it can be sufficiently recognized that the Defendant inflicted bodily injury on the victim as stated in this part of the facts charged.

With regard to the facts of assault that the court below acquitted, there exists a consistent statement of the victim and the statement of the witness I, which corresponds to the victim's statement, while contrary to this, the witness J's statement in the court of original instance appears to be unsatisfying the situation at the time of theJ at the time, and thus it is difficult to believe this. Thus, the fact that the defendant inflicted an injury on the victim as stated in this part of the facts charged can

2) The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (2 million won in penalty) is too unhued and unfair.

B. The lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

2. Determination as to the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts

A. (1) On October 22, 2014, the summary of the official death room is that the Defendant, on October 22, 2014, worked together with the victim E (24 tax) (24 tax) in the toilets located in Daejeon-gu Daejeon, Daejeon-gu, about October 22, 2014.

말했다는 이유로, 그곳에 있던 방향제 스프레이로 피해자 E의 머리를 2회, 주먹으로 좌측 귀 부위를 10회, 입술 부위를 10회 가량 때리고, 발로 복부를 5회, 얼굴을 3회 가량 때려 피해자로 하여금 약 3 주간의 치료를 요하는 기타 머리 부분의 열린 상처, 귓바퀴의 열린 상처를 가하였다.

2) The lower court determined that there was a victim E’s statement (written statements in court, accusation, each statement in police and prosecutor’s protocol) and F’s self-statement (Evidence Nos. 8) as evidence as to this part of the facts charged (additional assault). However, the lower court’s judgment is reasonable from October 22, 2014 to the date of the instant crime (the date of the instant crime).