The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although Defendant 1 was faced with body in the process of a dispute with e.g. F, Defendant 2 did not take a bath or assault to F as stated in the facts charged.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which convicted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court (six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below regarding the assertion of mistake of fact are consistently made from the investigative agency to the court of the court of the court below to the effect that “the defendant made a serious bath to himself/herself and made a strong violence against the witness on one occasion due to his/her fingers”, and ② the F and the accident scene together sent to the scene of the accident.

G In addition, in the investigative agency and the court of the court below, the defendant stated in the court of the trial that "a witness to have a F with a finger while near the Inspector F while the defendant was interested" was "F with a finger," and the court of the court below stated that "H did not witness a F with a finger by a finger, but f with F," while doing a dispute with F;

Skn knife

Comprehensively taking account of the fact that “the Defendant testified to the effect that it was “,” the Defendant testified to the effect that it was sufficient to fully recognize the fact that the Defendant prices F’s name at one time due to his/her fingers as stated in the facts charged.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. It is recognized that there is no record that the defendant has been punished for the same offense as the same offense, and that the degree of the assault of this case is relatively minor.

However, the crime of this case is serious to police officers without responding to a police officer's request for cooperation in investigation after receiving a report of gambling.