The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although misunderstanding of facts recognizes the fact that a defendant uses tangible force by putting a dubbl of the victim, it cannot be deemed that the victim suffered bodily injury due to such defendant's act, and the written diagnosis of bodily injury submitted by the victim cannot be recognized as credibility, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case and affected the conclusion

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination of misunderstanding of facts refers to the injury of the victim’s physical integrity or physiological function. The injury of the victim’s bodily injury means the injury of the victim’s biological function. In light of the extremely insignificant circumstance accompanied by the assault, the injury is an ordinary circumstance or inconvenience that may occur during his daily life without any assault, and the injury of the victim cannot be said to fall under the injury of the victim in the absence of natural healing and physiological function without any need for medical treatment. Furthermore, determination of whether the injury of the victim’s physical integrity or physiological function was inflicted should not be made objectively and uniformly, but should be made based on the victim’s age, sex, physical and mental specific condition, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 9Do4305, Feb. 25, 200; 2005Do1039, May 26, 2005). Meanwhile, the diagnosis of the victim’s injury submitted by the victim is generally short of medical knowledge and evidence of the victim’s injury after identifying the cause of the injury of the victim and its direct diagnosis of the injury.