The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of grounds for appeal;

가. 상해죄 부분 피고인은 피해자의 손가락을 잡고 꺽은 사실이 없고, 상해에 대한 고의가 없었다.

B. Since the Defendant entered the victim’s singing points in which the victim’s operation was singing down with the relationship with the victim, the Defendant was presumed to have given the victim the victim’s consent, the Defendant’s act, as stated in this part of the facts charged, does not constitute larceny against the Defendant’s intrusion on the structure at night.

2. Determination

A. The judgment of the court below on the establishment of the crime of injury can be sufficiently recognized when considering the following factors: (a) the defendant and the victim at the time of the instant case, which can be known by various evidence duly adopted and examined, comprehensively taking into account the developments leading up to fighting between the defendant and the victim; (b) the process of physical fighting; (c) the part and degree of the injury; and (d) the victim's statement of injury; and (b) the defendant had the intention to inflict an injury on the victim, as stated in

Since it is reasonable to see that the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. Presumption of the victim's consent to the entry into a structure and the consumption of the goods is presumed to have not been actually given.

In light of all objective circumstances at the time of the act, it refers to the case in which it is anticipated that the injured person would have naturally consented if he had known the contents of the act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do8081, Mar. 24, 2006). The following circumstances revealed by various evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, namely, ① the injured person at the time of the instant case suspected of the Defendant’s identity and address, etc., and did not receive the Defendant’s telephone, and avoided the Defendant, ② the victim had the key to allow the Defendant to arbitrarily enter the singing place.