The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The accused of the grounds for appeal has no assaulted the victim;

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the victim's statement that corresponds to the facts charged in this case is reliable. According to this, the defendant can be recognized as having committed assault by putting the victim's back part once, and the judgment of the court below did not err and adversely affect the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts.

① The victim stated at the investigative agency that “the victim, while driving a taxi at the time of the instant case, glicking the Defendant’s vehicle towards the Defendant’s driving vehicle, and the Defendant stopped the victim’s taxi by blocking the cab and making the victim stop one time at the victim’s seat.” The victim stated at the court of the lower court that “the Defendant included the victim’s hand in the taxi and made the back part of the victim’s taxi,” and consistently stated at the court of the lower court, that “the victim’s hand in the taxi and made the victim’s hand in the taxi at the time of the victim’s back,” and that the victim’

② The Defendant pointed out that there is no credibility in the victim’s statement since the victim reversed the victim’s statement on the part assaulted in the court below’s trial. However, considering that the time when the victim stated in the court below was about eight months after the date of occurrence of the instant case, and that the victim clearly stated in the above statement that “the rear part is satisfied” after he stated his memory in the above statement process, it is difficult to view that the victim’s statement was not reliable solely on the ground that the victim was aware of the victim’s netly abused part.

③ According to the results of the reproduction of CCTV video CDs taken on the instant site, the Defendant is a vehicle that he/she operates in front of the victim’s taxi.