The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant alleged misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine merely saw the victim of the assault to take a bath and fluor, thereby getting the part of the neck and shoulder by using assaulting him, and did not inflict any bodily injury, such as booming or gluoring, or the victim’s fluor, which requires four weeks of medical treatment, or the victim’s fluor’s fluor was not originally good, so it is difficult to recognize a substantial relationship between the Defendant’s assault and the bodily injury.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles or affecting the conclusion of judgment.

B. In light of the fact that the defendant suffered injury from the injured party, the defendant has no previous conviction since 2004, and the defendant has old age and economic difficulties, the punishment sentenced by the court below (2 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s judgment and the evidence duly admitted and examined by the first instance court as to the assertion of misunderstanding the facts and the legal doctrine, namely, the victim was at the time of driving away from the Defendant immediately after the Defendant’s tobacco, and the victim was at the time of a tight face and the right side of the Defendant.

The statement is that the victim was under treatment in the emergency room on the day of the case, and the victim was under treatment as soon as possible, but the victim was under chronic chronitis, spawnosis, etc., but he was assaulted by the defendant, and was able to see as soon as possible after being abused by the defendant.

In full view of the facts stated in the judgment below, the facts constituting the crime can be fully recognized.

The defendant's assertion of facts is without merit.

B. The fact that the victim’s injury to the victim in determining unfair sentencing requires four weeks’ treatment, and that it is not agreed with the victim is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, the defendant and the victim seem to have arrived at each other, and the victim's dental services are normal.