The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles: The defendant in an injury by robbery committed assault against the victim with the victim H (hereinafter referred to as the "victim") on the issue of whether he paid a charge in advance, and there is no assault against the victim with the intent of illegal gains to evade the payment of taxi expenses.

The court below found the victim guilty on the basis of the victim's statement that did not have any other credibility as a result of misconception of facts or misapprehension of the legal principles on the intent of unlawful acquisition.

B. At the time of the instant crime, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol and had weak ability to discern things or make decisions.

C. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (four years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The court below found the victim not guilty in the reasoning of the judgment as to the part of the injury inflicted upon the victim by assaulting the victim in the course of robbery and suppressing the victim's resistance, and 60,000 won from the inside money of the victim, and thereby causing the victim's injury, and found the victim guilty of the remaining injury by robbery against the victim in the relation of a comprehensive crime with the victim.

However, the judgment of the court below shall be appealed only by the defendant, and the prosecutor did not appeal. Although the part of innocence in the reasoning of the judgment of the court below was judged in the trial, the part is still out of the object of attack and defense between the parties, and it cannot be determined even from the object of attack and defense, and it cannot be determined in the part of innocence (see Supreme Court Decision 90Do2820, Mar. 12, 191). This part of the judgment of the court below shall be subject to the conclusion of innocence, and it shall not be judged again.

B. Error of facts or misapprehension of legal principles (1) The victim of the judgment below did not receive the taxi cost prepaid from the defendant at the time of departure from Busan, and is in Seoul.