All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant (person who is a factual error) does not have any scarcity or disturbing the disturbance as stated in the facts charged.

B. The lower court’s sentence (a fine of three million won) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the 112 Report Processing List, the following circumstances can be acknowledged by the lower court by comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts. (i) The Defendant reported to the police four times on September 8, 2017 through September 01:14 through 01:3, and thereafter, on the part of the report on the part of the Seocho Hospital that took place 01:40, the Defendant stated that the Defendant’s testimony was “consort/sort disturbance”. This is sufficiently consistent with the Defendant’s testimony at the lower court’s judgment that it was difficult for the Defendant to take a sound at the police station from around September 8, 2017, by making several calls to the Seocho Emergency Hospital CT shooting room, emergency watch room, and outside the police station, and that the Defendant was unable to take a disturbance with the victim’s testimony during the period of 10 hours and 10 days after leaving the parking lot by the police officer dispatched to the Seocho Hospital immediately after such reporting.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

B. The prosecutor’s sentencing on the prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing is based on statutory penalty, based on a discretionary judgment that takes into account the conditions for sentencing under Article 51 of the Criminal Act within a reasonable and reasonable scope, and is taking the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness.