The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-misunderstanding 1) The Defendant did not threaten the victim as stated in the lower judgment’s crime Nos. 2 (2) (2) (01:30 on April 17, 2015) and, in the case of Paragraph 3 (3) (2) (201:30 on March 17, 2015), there was a fact that he brought about three C in the date of entry, but there was an understanding of the victim, and there was no attacking the victim, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

2) In the case of Article 1 (1) of the crime of the lower judgment (an assault around April 16, 2015) (an assault around 21:15), the facts acknowledged by the Defendant are as follows: Provided, however, since the criminal facts recognized as having not been committed when the victim scams or camscams as stated in the criminal facts are exaggerated, these points should be considered in sentencing. In the case of paragraph 4 (4) (an assault around April 16, 2015) (an assault around 17:00 on April 16, 2015), the fact that the Defendant scams the victim’s face at one time, but it was not sealed on the restaurant wall by putting the victim’s head.

B. The sentence of the lower court (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts as to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, following the Defendant’s statement: (a) written statement prepared by the victim; (b) each police statement made by the victim; (c) the examination of the victim’s witness protocol by the lower court; and (d) the victim’s statement made on April 16, 2015; and (c) the victim filed a report with the Defendant on assault around 21:15; and (d) the victim prepared the written statement with respect to the Defendant, and the victim’s statement that “I am under the influence of 6:30/60 of April 16, 2015.” The victim did not fribly fri the Defendant’s statement that “I am under the influence of 15/150 of the Seoul High Court’s investigation records” that did not begin at the time of investigation by stating that “I am under the influence of fry and am under the influence of the Defendant’s statement.”