All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. (1) According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor (1) misunderstanding of facts, the wife suffered by the victim is deemed to have a poor physical health condition and to have caused a disturbance to the function of life.

The judgment of the court below which judged that the injured party's wife could naturally recover after the lapse of time does not constitute an injury. There is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts.

(2) The sentence imposed by the court below on unreasonable sentencing is too uneasible and unfair.

B. Defendant (1) was under the influence of the Defendant at the time of the instant crime, and the Defendant was in a state of mental disability.

(2) The sentence of imprisonment (six months of imprisonment) imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. The lower court found the Defendant not guilty of the charges of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (traffic assault, etc.) resulting from a driver’s injury on the ground that the injured party’s wife does not constitute an injury on the grounds of the circumstances indicated in its reasoning.

원심이 설시한 이유에다가 ① 피해자는 택시에서 피고인으로부터 폭행당하고 곧바로 피고인을 태워 황성파출소에 도착하였는바, 범행 직후인 2019. 1. 16. 23:04경 경주경찰서 황성파출소에서 조사받으면서 피고인으로부터 맞은 뒤통수는 통증이 없고 귀 부분은 얼얼하다고 진술하였는데, 같은 날 23:42경 찍은 사진에 의하면, 피해자의 귀 부분이 살짝 빨갛게 부은 것 외에는 다른 상처가 보이지 않는 점, ② 피해자가 그로부터 12일후 발급받은 상해진단서에는 병명이 ‘귀의 표재성 손상, 타박상’, 치료기간 ‘7일간’으로 기재되어 있으나 이는 최종진단이 아닌 임상적 추정이고, 향후 치료에 대한 소견도 '동통 지속시 약물치료 필요함'이라고 기재되어 있는 점을 더하여 보면, 원심의 판단은 정당하고, 사실을 오인하거나 법리를 오해한...