The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal is as follows: (a) the Defendant only made the victim 3 to 4 by hand with the floor of hand; and (b) there was no fact that the head of the victim was stuffed by drinking at sea water as stated in the facts charged in the instant case; (c) the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the entire facts charged solely by the testimony of the witness of the instant case lacking credibility, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

In addition, considering the above mistake of facts and other various circumstances of this case, the punishment sentenced by the court below (4 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The credibility of the statement made by the F and J in each investigative agency on the assertion of mistake of facts cannot be deemed to be recognized solely on the grounds that the statement was the victim and the victim’s deceased relationship. Moreover, it is difficult to deny the credibility of the statement made by G in the investigative agency only on the sole basis of the statement written by G submitted on July 17, 2013 by the Defendant.

Therefore, when comprehensively considering all the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, including the above evidence, the defendant can sufficiently recognize the fact that the head of the victim was stuffed in seawater, and the head and body of the victim were taken as stated in the judgment of the court below, and there is no error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts in the judgment of the court below as alleged by the defendant.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

B. Although the defendant's child to decide on the assertion of unfair sentencing is deemed to have taken the face from the victim first and the defendant brought the defendant into the crime of this case, it is extremely poor to the crime of this case due to the fact that the defendant's child, who is only 12 years of age, took a severe bath to the victim, and when the two preceding cautions are inflicted, etc., and it is difficult to view that the defendant is seriously against the crime of this case, and the court below's decision against the defendant.