The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The victims of misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles have not been treated and need to be treated, and there was sufficient circumstances to suspect objectivity and credibility of the medical certificate of injury, and there was no impediment to natural therapy and daily life, and thus, it is not an injury to the crime of injury.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (fine 4 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles refer to the injury of a victim’s physical integrity or physiological function. The injury of the relevant legal doctrine refers to the injury of a victim’s physical integrity or the injury of a physiological function. If a wound accompanied by an assault is extremely minor and there is no need to treat it naturally and there is no difficulty in daily life, it shall not be the injury of the crime of injury. However, it is premised on the same degree as the wound that can normally occur during daily life even if there is no assault. Thus, if the wound beyond such degree is caused by an assault, it shall be the injury. Determination of whether the injury of the victim’s physical integrity or physiological function was caused by an assault should not be objectively and uniformly determined, but shall be based on the victim’s age, gender, body, and mental and physical condition, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 9Do4305, Feb. 25, 200; 205Do1039, May 26, 2005).