All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant did not submit a written reason for appeal, the petition of appeal contains the content that the Defendant appealed a mistake of fact and an unfair appeal for sentencing. As such, the Defendant attempted to mislead the Defendant of facts as to the guilty portion and make an unfair assertion of sentencing. 1) The Defendant, as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment, did not put a knife against the victimized child, and even if so, the Defendant

Even if this does not constitute emotional abuse against victimized children, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

B. In light of the fact-misunderstanding and misapprehension of legal principles as to the violation of the Act on the Branching of Child Uniforms (Child Abuse), Article 17 subparag. 3 of the current Child Uniforms Act applies since the date and time of the crime was around March 2014 or around April 4, 2014. Even if the former Child Welfare Act applies, in light of the purport of the amendment, the aforementioned provision cannot be interpreted narrowly to the extent that “the act of abuse causing bodily injury to a child” as prescribed by Article 17 subparag. 3 of the former Child Uniforms Act cannot be interpreted to the extent that it causes injury to a child. Thus, the Defendant’s act as stated in this part of the facts charged constitutes physical abuse against the victimized child.

In addition, according to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant neglected the basic protection and rearing of victimized children in regard to the violation of the Act on the Punishment of Child Uniforms of this case (the abandonment and neglect of children) of the Child Uniforms of this case (the crime of this case).

However, the lower court rendered a not-guilty verdict on all the facts charged, and in so determining, the lower court erred by misapprehending the above facts.