The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the defendant did not have the intention of assault against the defendant, since he was not protruding to the victim.

The defendant only saw that the damaged person was sleeped around the defendant's house and slicking the damaged person's slick.

The judgment of the court below is that the defendant had the intention of assault to commit the crime of assault and thereby had a harming the victim.

There is an error of law affecting the judgment by misunderstanding facts.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, i.e., the defendant, at around 07:30 on July 19, 2015, when the defendant had a dispute with the victim, he reported to the police about the defendant's release at the victim's home, and the defendant was at the victim's house at least four times at the same time due to the defect that the victim reported to the police about the defendant's release at the victim's house, and the victim reported this fact to the police around 07:40 on the same day as the next day, and the defendant reported this fact to the police around 08:0 on the same day at the police investigation conducted around 00.

(3) In full view of the fact that the police investigation conducted on July 23, 2015, the victim stated that he was employed in the garden as well as the denial, and that the defendant consistently stated that he had the grass and the brickd to the victim's husband and wife at the time, and that he did not go against the wall at the time, but did not go against the wall at that time, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant had the criminal intent of assault, and that he was faced with the wall to the victim. Thus, there was an error of mistake of fact as pointed out by the defendant in the judgment of the court below.

subsection (b) of this section.

Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. The appeal by the defendant is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal by the defendant is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.