The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. There is an error of mistake of facts in the judgment of the court of original judgment which judged otherwise even though the reason for appeal did not correspond to the victim of the dust caused by the defendant.

2. According to the judgment of the court below and the court below, the victim was a fishing big instructor before the front gbbbbbbbbbbus at the time of the instant case, and many members used a large amount of garbage source on the entrance while conducting a fishing big movement at the space between the front gbuss of the victim and the opposite entrance. The inside of the gbbbus room is a glass wall, so members could have discovered the defendant who was fluorous at the entrance while using the gbinbus, and many members could have seen the defendant who tried to have gluorized the bluort, but it appears that the victim could not get out only of the victim who did not seem to have been fluort, and even if the victim did not have been fluort, it can be seen that the victim could not have been fluortly affected by the victim's testimony even if the victim did not have been fluort, it is difficult for the victim to have been fluorized by the victim's.