The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the defendant only has a verbal dispute with the victim, and there was no physical contact with the victim, or a harming the victim's shoulder and chest part.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.

2. 이 사건 공소사실 피고인은 2012. 5. 22. 16:00경 평택시 C 내에서, 피해자 D(67세)이 주문하여 설치한 샷시 설치문제로 말다툼을 하던 중 피해자의 어깨와 가슴 부위를 밀어 벽에 부딪히게 하여 피해자에게 약 2주간의 치료를 필요로 하는 흉벽부 및 양어깨의 좌상 등의 상해를 가하였다.

3. The court below found the defendant guilty on the ground that "In light of the fact that the witness F and E who had been at the scene other than the defendant at the time of committing the crime except for the defendant was physically recognized to have suffered injury by assaulting the victim, and that in particular, E is a lessee of the victim's building but there is no reason to make an unfavorable statement to the defendant as an objective third party, although E is the lessee of the victim's building, there was no reason to make an unfavorable statement to the defendant, at the time of committing the crime of this case, the police was called up by the victim's report, and the part of the injury in the written diagnosis of injury written on the day following the crime of this case corresponds with E and F's assault report made by E and F.

4. However, the above determination by the court below is difficult to accept in light of the following points. A.

1) Under the premise, the Defendant, a construction business operator, such as new cities, etc., is the victim’s husband and wife, and the victim’s 34 foot building (hereinafter “instant building”) owned by the victim.

) New installation works (hereinafter “new installation works of this case”) such as the third floor entrance door.

A 1.80,000 won is contracted and shall be new construction around May 11, 2012.