The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, as stated in the facts of the lower judgment, did not err by assaulting the victim and inflicting an injury on the victim.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the fact that the Defendant assaulted the victim as stated in the facts constituting the lower judgment and inflicted bodily injury on the victim is recognized.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of facts is without merit.

1) The victim consistently testified from the investigation to the court of the court below to the effect that “the Defendant assaulted the victim as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the court below and inflicted bodily injury on the victim.”

Moreover, the victim has made a very detailed statement about the situation before and after each assault and injury.

2) A written confirmation of each injury diagnosis report that conforms to the above statement of the injured party’s medical record may fully recognize the objectivity and credibility as follows.

A) On January 23, 2013, immediately after the date and time stated in the lower judgment’s crime No. 1. 1. A., the victim was transferred to U U.S. Department.

In the medical record prepared at the time, "I seem to have head as a head (her husband)" is stated as the medical record, and the medical record is written as " brain-dead, fluoral base, fluoral base, multiple fluoral base, and fluoral blood" under the name of the diagnosis.

The injury part and degree mentioned in the above diagnosis name do not conflict with the course and degree of the injury claimed by the victim.

Moreover, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the victim had had symptoms of brain-dead, dystyp, dystyp, and stypherosis before the above temporary date.

On the other hand, there is no fact that the victim filed a complaint based on the data of the medical examination and treatment, immediately after the victim received the medical examination and treatment at the hospital before the complaint of this case.

February 2, 2017