The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the victim’s face and head side, the Defendant merely suffered bodily injury, such as the strike and loss of dental technicians who require two weeks’ treatment, and the reaction of acute sacrife and acute sastrus, which require four weeks’ treatment, and there was no injury in light of the victim.

On the other hand, the court below found the defendant guilty on the grounds of the testimony, etc. of the victim without credibility and witness E of the court below that the defendant injured the victim, and made a false accusation that the victim was in contact with the victim, and erred by misapprehending the facts.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and community service) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) The lower court’s determination on the assertion of mistake of facts is justifiable in its judgment that found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in light of the following facts and circumstances that can be recognized by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, and the lower court’s determination on the charge is just, and it cannot be found that there was any error of misconception of facts. In full view of the result of the first instance court’s examination and the result of the additional examination of evidence conducted by the court of first instance from the perspective of the principle of public trial-oriented trial to the date of closing argument, the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by the witness is deemed to be significantly unfair, except in exceptional cases where it is deemed that maintaining the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by the witness is considerably unfair.