All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (misunderstanding of facts, guilty part of the lower judgment) is the manager of a commercial building, and thus, the Defendant’s attempt to attack the Defendant is not established.

B. Whether a prosecutor 1) who mispers the facts (not guilty part of the court below) will file a civil petition without making a contribution.

The defendant in the B's question needs to be specialized by the administrator, regardless of the inclusion of the civil petition in lieu of specific answers.

“The Defendant had the intention to file a civil petition without making a contribution to B.

The defendant's speech constitutes a threat of harm and injury to the crime of attack.

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

2. Determination

A. In the lower court’s determination as to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal on this part, and the lower court rejected the said assertion in detail and convicted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged.

Examining the judgment of the court below and the court below in comparison with the evidence duly adopted and examined, the judgment of the court below is just, and there is an error of law by mistake of facts alleged by the defendant.

subsection (b) of this section.

B. In a criminal trial as to the prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of facts, the recognition of facts should be based on strict evidence with probative value, which leads to a judge to have the degree of having no reasonable doubt. Thus, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof fails to sufficiently reach such a degree of conviction, even if there is doubt of guilt, such as the defendant’s assertion or defense contradictory or uncomfortable dismissal, it should be determined in the interests of the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do1487, Apr. 28, 2011). Moreover, the appellate trial has the character as a follow-up trial even after it is in the face of the trial.