The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles, the Defendant did not have any fact, and did not have any intention of assault, even though he only sealed the victim who was involved in his external gambling at the time and place of the decision of the court below.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which convicted the defendant on a different premise is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts and the misunderstanding of legal principles.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (an amount of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Assault as stated in the crime of misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine refers to the exercise of physical or mental pain to a person’s body. The illegality should be determined by comprehensively taking into account the purpose and intent of the act, circumstances at the time of the act, mode and type of the act, existence and degree of suffering to the victim, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2000Do5716, Jan. 10, 2003; 2016Do9302, Oct. 27, 2016). Taking into account the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the lower court committed an assault at the time of the Defendant’s commission of the victim, and committed an intentional act against the victim.

The decision is proper, and there is no error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as alleged by the defendant.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

① From the police investigation stage to the original trial, the victim’s statement is consistent and concrete as to the circumstances surrounding the dispute with the defendant, the defendant’s speech and behavior, and the situation before and after the crime, at the time and place of the original judgment.

The credibility of the victim's statement is recognized without showing any circumstance to be false in the victim's statement.

(2) The injured party stated in the court below that the injured party was able to have suffered from the injured party while making a conflict of interest due to the acts of the injured party's external stay, and that the part facing the situation has been cut away even after that reason.