The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant did not assault the victim, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (one million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances can be acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of misunderstanding of facts: (i) the victim took the part of the victim’s left chest part of the victim’s chest from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court, thereby making the victim go to the wall and making the victim go to the wall.

In full view of the following facts: (a) the victim’s wife consistently stated the facts of damage; (b) immediately after the instant case reported the fact that the victim’s wife was in contact with the Defendant; (c) the Defendant was receiving medical treatment at the Masan Hospital in the same day as Masan Hospital in the same Eup/Myeon; and (d) the part of the victim’s assault as stated in the instant facts charged, the Defendant could recognize the fact that the victim inflicted bodily injury by cutting the victim as stated in the instant facts charged.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of facts is without merit.

B. It is recognized that the degree of injury suffered by the victim due to the instant crime is relatively minor and the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant.

On the other hand, the crime of this case was committed on the grounds that the injured party, who was in dispute with the defendant's boundary, tried to move the victim's chest into the ground of the defendant and to move gas, and the nature of the crime was not less than that of the victim's chest, and it was not less than that of the crime. In full view of the records and various sentencing conditions in this case, such as the background of the crime of this case, the age of the defendant, sexual conduct, environment, etc., the punishment of the court below is too unreasonable.