The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The grounds of appeal by the defendant (1) are as follows: although the defendant misleads the defendant as to knife and knife the victim, there was no knife knife with the victim, and there was no injury to the victim

(2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The reasoning for the prosecutor’s appeal is too unaffored and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal.

In the first instance of the trial, the prosecutor applied the provisions of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc. to "special injury", and the applicable provisions of the Act to "Articles 3 (1) and 2 (1) 3 of the former Punishment of Violences, etc. Act and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act" to "Articles 258-2 (1) and 257 (1) of the Criminal Act" to "Article 258-2 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act to "the 7 criminal facts of the indictment and the part "the dangerous weapons" of the 11 criminal facts of the indictment to "hazardous goods", and since the court was subject to adjudication by permitting this, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.

B. Determination as to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts: Provided, however, the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts among the grounds for appeal is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined.

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, in particular, the victim E's statement in the court below and the investigative agency, the evidence photograph of the knife, the victim's body photograph, diagnosis document, and CCTV image, the defendant cited the knife knife, which is a dangerous object like the facts charged, as well as the victim's knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3...