The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error) does not contain any injury to the victim as shown in the facts charged in this case, and the witness C, E, and F’s statements and a written statement of G preparation presented by the court below as evidence are ambiguous and inconsistent with the contents of the statements, and thus, are inadmissible.

Therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the fact that the defendant was sentenced to a fine as the above evidence of this case.

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant did not inflict an injury upon the victim as stated in the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court determined that the Defendant was guilty of having inflicted an injury upon the victim as stated in the instant case, considering the following: (a) the witness’s statement was consistent with the investigative agency from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court; (b) there are no other circumstances to reject the credibility of the above statement; and (c) the Defendant alleged that the Defendant was not located at a distance from which he could assault the victim due to the tables between the Defendant and the victim; (d) however, at the time of the instant case, the Defendant was placed in the e-mail form (the photograph submitted by the Defendant as reference material was posted in the form of “v.,” but according to the witness’s testimony and investigation record, according to the witness’s photograph written in 29 pages, and thus, it appears that there was a distance from which the Defendant could sufficiently assault the victim as stated in the instant facts charged.

B. In addition to the above circumstances admitted by the court below, the defendant asserts that the testimony of the witness C, E, and F in the court below is not reliable because the testimony of the witness C, E, and F is ambiguous and contradictory in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the court below and duly examined by the court below, but the witness's testimony at the court below cannot be granted credibility upon a thorough examination of each witness's examination protocol.