The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles with respect to the injury related to the victim E (1) the Defendant only carried a lar part of the victim’s timber and led the victim into the ticket box, and did not cause any dispute. In addition, the Defendant cannot be deemed to have caused physical damage to the victim under the Criminal Act. (2) As to the injury related to the victim’s special injury related to the victim C, (3) as to the injury related to the victim’s short group of each item, the Defendant was cut down on the floor, and there was no fact about the rear part of the victim, and (4) as to the above items, it cannot be deemed that the above items constitute a dangerous object under the Criminal Act.

3) Therefore, the judgment of the court below that convicted all of the facts charged of this case on different premise is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts, or by misunderstanding the legal principles on injury and dangerous articles under the Criminal Act, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. (B) Even if each of the facts charged of this case is found guilty, the court below’s punishment (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and one hundred and twenty hours of community service work) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In the judgment of the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the defendant argued the same as the above (1) through (3) among the grounds for appeal in this part, and the court below rejected the above assertion in detail with the defendant's assertion and its decision under the title "the judgment of the defendant and his defense counsel" among the judgment. In comparison with the above judgment of the court below, the court below is justified in finding that the defendant suffered bodily injury as prescribed in the Criminal Act by using violence such as the facts constituting the crime in the original judgment against the victim E and the victim C, by taking account of the circumstances as stated in its judgment.