The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles can only be naturally cured without treatment because it is minor and thus, it does not constitute an injury resulting from robbery.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (four years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as to the assertion of injury by robbery refers to the injury of a victim’s body completeness or physiological function. In the event that a wound accompanied by an assault is extremely minor and there is no need for treatment, and thus there is no obstacle in daily life, it may be deemed that the injury does not constitute the injury of the crime of injury. However, this is premised on the same degree as the wound that may normally occur during daily life even if there is no assault. Thus, the injury is caused by an assault. Determination of whether the bodily integrity or physiological function of the victim is damaged should not be objectively and uniformly determined, but should be made based on the physical and mental concrete state, such as the victim’s age, gender, physical strength, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2018Do4958, Sept. 13, 2018). 2) In light of the following facts and evidence duly adopted by the lower court, it is difficult to view the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the Defendant’s lawful adoption of the crime of assault and the victim’s daily life without difficulty.

(1) At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant: (a) dives the victim thereafter.