The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Despite the fact-misunderstanding and misapprehension of legal principles, the judgment of the court below that found the Defendant guilty of this part by making a different judgment, and there was an error of misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (it is alleged that the Defendant is not the two items of "Cmmb", which is a violent organization, but this is not a constituent element of crime, and thus, is considered as an element of sentencing). (b) The punishment of the court below that was unfair in sentencing (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the misapprehension of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. The legal doctrine does not necessarily mean that the intent of a crime is not necessarily acknowledged, but it is possible to recognize or have predicted the possibility or risk that the constituent consequence may occur due to one’s own act, and dolusent intent may be acknowledged even if the perception or predictability is uncertain (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2012Do3475, Jan. 31, 2013; 2010Do15144, Jan. 13, 201). (b) The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, the defendant’s injury to the victim on several occasions, and at least one bed with bed with bed with bed with bed with bed with bed with bed with bed with bed with bed with bed with bed with bed with bed with bed with bed with bed with bed with bed with the victim, and the result of the judgment below that the victim could have suffered injury with bed with bed with bed with bed with bed with bed with bed with bed with.

The defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. We examine the judgment on the unfair argument of sentencing, and reflects the defendant's confession of some crimes.