All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant E was out of the Defendant’s mother side and E’s reputation, and there was physical fighting between E and E by exercising violence first against the Defendant’s son.

The court below found the defendant guilty of assaulting the victim by making the victim 2 to 3 smuggling, while the defendant did not file a complaint by taking into account the fact that the defendant's mother was hospitalized in E, and even after the defendant's mother was hospitalized. However, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts.

B. In light of the prosecutor E’s statements, damaged photographs, diagnosis reports, etc., the lower court found the Defendant not guilty of the injury even if E sufficiently recognizes the injury. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts.

2. Determination

A. We examine the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts, and the victim E used his chest from the first accusation to the court of the original trial.

It is consistently stated that F and H consistently stated the defendant's chest in the court of original instance.

The statement (the court record No. 84, 90, 91). The witness S and the witness V of the court below stated that the defendant did not assault the victim. However, S is the defendant's words, and V is the mother, and it is difficult to believe this in light of its relationship, and S was the victim's carer left the victim.

However, in light of the fact that the statement about the circumstances at the time is different, such as stating that there is no fact that another nursing service provider speaks or turns out the victim, and that, even based on the statement of V and the defendant, S is either unable to use the damaged arms or has inconvenience, and thus, S appears not to be a citizen of the victim, but the defendant is the defendant.