The judgment below

The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles 1) The Defendant did not inflict an injury on the victim A. Although there are circumstances that the victim’s statement is not consistent and is doubtful on the date of the diagnosis in the written diagnosis of injury, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine. 2) The Defendant did not insult the victim A as described in the facts charged.

At the time, the victim took a bath to the defendant and made the victim’s speech, such as “unfavorable gue”, at a corresponding level, but this does not violate social rules and does not meet the requirements of performance, and thus, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles or misunderstanding the facts to be found guilty.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of KRW 700,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. On May 11, 2013, the summary of the facts charged is as follows: (a) the Defendant: (b) around 17:30 on May 11, 2013, the Defendant: (c) was able to kill the victim’s face; (d) the Victim A told the Defendant’s father F of the Defendant that “I am hick with the abnormal voice of the son; and (e) the Defendant am hick with the victim, on the ground that “I am hicking with the son,” “I am hicking with the son, I am hicking with the son’s face; and (e) the Defendant did not consistently assert the victim’s face from the investigative agency to the victim’s face, such as the victim’s knicking of her flaps, and flabing the son’s flaf on several occasions; and (e) the Defendant had consistently claimed that the victim’s face from the investigative agency to the victim’s face.

. This part.