The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The court below found the defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged on the ground that the defendant only saw the victim's part part of the dubage as the victim's part of the dubage, etc. by mistake of facts and witness E. The court below erred in the misapprehension of facts and affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. In light of the fact that the Defendant does not reflect on the unreasonable sentencing, the lower court’s measure of suspending the sentence (or a fine of KRW 200,000) is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. At around 16:30 on May 5, 2012, the Defendant found the victim’s surface before the victim D’s residence located in the Dong-gu dong-gu, dong-gu, dong-gu, Seoul, and resisted the victim as a neighbor.

Accordingly, the victim had the plastic brooms that were cited by the defendant several times so that the defendant can protruding the soil and water apparatus of brooms in the face, clothes, etc. of the defendant, while avoiding this, the defendant injured the defendant so that it can be shocked by brooms.

On the contrary, the Defendant assaulted the victim by breathing flaps.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the remainder of the charges except this part of the facts charged, on the ground that the Defendant, even though he was aware of the fact that he had flatd one time the victim’s flat, he did not flat the victim’s flat, but could only prove that the Defendant had flatd the victim’s flat, as alleged by the Defendant, by using a witness D and F’s respective legal statements, field pictures, and pictures.

C. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, i.e., the victim, consistently from the beginning stage of the investigation to the court below, are the soil of plastic brooms.