The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant, as stated in the facts charged in this case, was faced with the part of the victim's left blue part of the victim's left blue. However, the upper part of the victim's accident does not constitute injury under the Criminal Act because it does not reach the degree of harm to the completeness of body or harm physiological functions.

Nevertheless, the court below found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The injury of a judgment means impairing the completeness of the body of a victim or impairing physiological functions.

In a case where there is a very minor circumstance accompanied by a assault and thus there is no need for treatment, and thus there is no obstacle in natural therapy and daily life, it does not constitute the injury of the crime of injury. However, this is premised on the same degree as the wound that can normally occur in the daily life even if there is no assault. Therefore, if there is a crime of assault, the injury should be caused by the assault. Whether the physical integrity of the victim is damaged or the physiological function is hindered should not be objectively and uniformly determined, but should be determined on the basis of the victim’s age, gender, physical and mental specific conditions, such as physical and mental condition, etc.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2007Do9794 Decided November 13, 2008, etc.). In light of the above legal principles, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the health stand, the original court and the trial court, namely, ① the victim, who was walking ahead of the market indicated in the facts charged of this case, tried to sit down on the victim’s left side and rear ablue part of the victim’s operation after the Defendant’s implied loading.