The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal asserts that the lower court did not err by accepting only the assertion of the victim with no credibility, and by misunderstanding the facts, that affected the conclusion of the judgment, even though the Defendant did not have any false fact by using violence against the victim.

2. Of the judgment of the court below, the dismissal of the prosecution on the ground of the victim's non-existence of punishment is examined only as to the remaining injury and non-existence of judgment.

The following facts and circumstances can be acknowledged according to the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below on June 16, 2010. In full view of this, it is sufficient to find the defendant guilty of having inflicted an injury upon the victim on June 16, 2010.

① The victim stated in the police and the prosecutor’s office that “the defendant suffered bodily injury in the face of the victim with the toilet slicker at around 23:00 on June 16, 2010, and slicker’s face with the slicker’s slacks,” and the contents of the statement are very consistent and concrete.

② On June 17, 2010, the next day, around 02:41, the victim demanded a taxi driver to be assaulted by her husband (the defendant) and to report to the police. On the same day, the victim called the police officer (G and H) around 02:48 on the same day, and was investigated by her and the Defendant along with the police box.

③ At the time of mobilization, H, a police officer, expressed that “I did not assault a victim, but rather met,” the Defendant’s speech that “I am the victim,” is unsatisfying.

(4) On June 17, 2010, the aggrieved person shall keep to the right side of the inner part and the skin blood transfusion, the stroke and the skin blood transfusion, the stroke part, the upper part of the right, the upper part, the stroke part of the main part, and the right side of the International Hospital.