The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact-finding, the Defendant did not have prices the inside part of the victim, and was only able to flickly flickly with the victim, and did not have the intent to blickly go beyond the victim's will or flickly flick with the victim's inner part.

Nevertheless, the lower court convicted the Defendant of the instant facts charged by misunderstanding the facts.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (two million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, and in particular, video materials (dynamic image) on the face of a crime, the following facts are acknowledged: (a) the defendant was faced with the victim's neck that the defendant had left hand by force; (b) the two parts of the victim's neck that the defendant had left hand; (c) at the same time, the defendant was faced with the victim's face face by the defendant's fault; and (d) the defendant was punished by the victim and the fluor, and (e) the defendant was damaged by the victim.

In addition, in light of the content and degree of force of the defendant's use of force, etc., the defendant was aware of the assault, which is the cause of the injury, and thereby, did not recognize that the victim could suffer the injury as stated in the judgment below. The establishment of the crime of injury is sufficient when there is awareness of the assault, which is the cause of the injury, and it is not necessary until the existence of the intention to cause the injury (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 9Do4341, Jul. 4, 200). Even if the defendant did not intend to cause the injury to the defendant at the time as alleged by the defendant, the establishment of the crime of

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty on the ground that the defendant inflicted an injury on the victim as stated in the facts charged of this case is just and there is no error of law such as misconception of facts as alleged by the defendant

B. The argument on unfair sentencing is made.