The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. A. The Defendant is guilty of a misunderstanding of the fact, but there was no fact that the victim was frightened, and that the result of the injury was inflicted on the victim.

shall not be effective.

However, the judgment of the court below that recognized the defendant's crime of injury was erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (an amount of KRW 3 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts

A. On May 23, 2017, the Defendant: (a) around 19:00 on the front side of the Gu-si building C; (b) on the ground that the victim D did not resolve the issue related to the transfer of a corporation with the Defendant, etc.; (c) on the part of the Defendant, the Defendant made once a son’s left upper part of the victim’s loss; and (d) on the part of the Defendant, once a son took part in the part of the victim.

As a result, the Defendant inflicted an injury on the victim, such as the pain of a sprink, which requires approximately four weeks of treatment.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged on the ground that the Defendant’s partial statement in the lower court, the victim’s legal statement in the lower court, the victim’s written diagnosis, and the content of the investigation report (CCTV image, etc.), etc. were conducted 2 days after the date of the occurrence of the instant case, and the victim did not seem to have suffered scrupt on the upper part of the scrupt, and there was no specific circumstance to deem that the victim was injured on the upper part of the scrupt during the period from the date of the instant case to the date of the said diagnosis.

(c)

(1) According to the evidence duly adopted and examined in the lower court’s judgment, the victim consistently appeared in the investigative agency and the lower court’s court, and consistently, “The Defendant did so on the left side of drinking.”

“The Defendant’s act is recognized, as it appears to bring about the victim’s left side, even if the CCTV images taken at the time of the instant case were to be used.”