The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal in this case was already cut down before the removal of the Defendant's Crown, and it did not have a duty of care to properly treat the Crown with ordinary methods, and even if not, the Crown in this case cannot be assessed as injury due to its completeness as it has already been destroyed.

Nevertheless, the court below found all of the charges of this case guilty, and the court below erred by misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles that affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the court below based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, namely, ① the victim stated that the nurse and the defendant offered treatment to cover 300,000 won or more at the time of the instant case, and that the nurse and the defendant offered treatment to cover 300,000 won, regardless of whether the nurse and the defendant were included in the table (the 7th page of the investigation record). ② If a dentist had been present as a witness at the court below before removing the crown, there is no reason to proceed with the treatment in this case, and the method of removing the crown stated that the crown was well good (the 59,74 pages of the trial record). ③ If it was judged that the crown had moved while considering the crown, it would be difficult to treat the crown if the crown had already been satched (the 1st day of the trial record). However, the defendant argued that the crown treatment was insignificant at the time of this case.