The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is that the Defendant is a member of the unlimited partnership D (hereinafter “D”) located in Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-si, and the victim E (n, 52 years old) is a D’s accounting employee.

On April 2, 2013, at D office around 17:00, the Defendant signed a simple receipt on the victim’s book, and the victim was found to have faced the above receipt with the face of the Defendant. The Defendant was at the victim’s cell phone, and the victim was at the victim’s cell phone, and the victim was at the victim’s cell phone, who was at the victim’s cell phone, and who was at the victim’s hand in order to take the Defendant’s cell phone from the victim’s cell phone, assaulted the victim by spreading the part of the victim’s shoulder with the defect in order to capture the victim’s cell phone.

B. On May 16, 2013, at D office around 11:00, the injured Defendant: (a) prevented the victim from removing official doors from the National Tax Service attached on the wall of the office on the ground that the office was removed on the ground that the victim’s office was removed; and (b) caused the victim’s injury in the course of physical fighting by taking the victim’s hand, and requiring approximately two weeks of treatment to the victim.

2. Summary of the grounds for appeal and the judgment of the court below

A. (1) At the time of mistake of facts, the Defendant did not assault or inflict bodily injury on the victim as stated in the facts charged of this case.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found all of the charges guilty is erroneous by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The punishment sentenced by the court below on unreasonable sentencing (700,000 won of fine) is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court also asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal of mistake of facts, but the lower court rejected the Defendant’s above assertion by comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly admitted and examined, and found the Defendant guilty of all the facts charged in this case.

The reasons for conviction cited by the court below are as follows.

(1) The victim is from the police to the court of original judgment.