The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant’s act of misunderstanding the facts and misunderstanding the legal principles led to physical injury to the victimized child.

It is difficult to see that there was an intentional act that the defendant inflicts bodily injury on the victimized child.

It is also difficult to see it.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the misapprehension of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. The former part of Article 17 subparag. 3 of the Child Uniforms Land Act provides that an act of physical abuse that causes physical harm to a child is one of the prohibited acts of physical abuse. Here, the term “injury to a child” refers to an act of causing a negative change to the body to an extent equivalent thereto even if it does not reach the degree of “injury” which causes physical integrity or harm to physiological functions by exercising physical force against a child (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do6781, May 12, 2016). Meanwhile, the term “ emotional abuse that causes harm to a child’s mental health and development” includes not only cases where it actually impedes the mental health and normal development of a child, but also cases where it is deemed reasonable to recognize that there is a risk or possibility of harm to a child’s mental health and development, but also cases where it is sufficiently probable to recognize the risk or possibility of harm to a child’s mental health and development by its own act (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do1384, May 12, 2015).

B. The judgment of the court below in this case