The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

There is no relation between misunderstanding of the substance of the grounds for appeal, misunderstanding of the legal principles, and assault of the defendant and the injured person.

The unfair sentencing of the court below (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

In other words, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine, namely, ① the Defendant, from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court, took the damaged person out of the restaurant glass, without specifically memory by drinking alcohol at the time.

2. At the time, witness Mather, who had been working, consistently stated to the purport that “The Defendant opened a restaurant in favor of the victim and was at the time when the victim was 6-7 times by drinking or sending the victim to the investigation agency.

(3) On the closed circuit television (CCTV) installed in a restaurant, the Defendant was able to take part in an emergency operation, such as a refratization and a removal of blood species, by taking into account the following: (a) the Defendant was able to take part in the victim’s body several times at the bottom of a restaurant; (b) the Defendant was able to take part in the victim’s body; and (c) the Defendant was able to take part in a steel railing machine installed in the outermost of a restaurant; and (d) the Defendant was able to take part in the cement floor at the scene after being flatd by the Defendant; (b) the victim was flated and was sent to the hospital immediately after being sent to the hospital, and (c) the Defendant was able to suffer any injury other than the above flat; and (d) there was no circumstance that the victimized person suffered any injury other than the Defendant’s above flating one’s sexual intercourse, etc. by the Defendant.

can be sufficiently recognized.

Therefore, the defendant's mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles are without merit.

The defendant who has been punished several times as a crime of the same kind of judgment on the illegal argument of sentencing shall be the victim.