The judgment below

The part of the case of the defendant is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, misunderstanding of the legal principles and misunderstanding of the facts, the Defendant did not inflict an injury upon the victim as the principal soldier at the time of committing the part of the 2015 Highest 1079 crime as indicated in the lower judgment.

B. At the time of each of the instant crimes, the Defendant was in a state of mental and physical weakness or mental loss due to drinking.

(c)

The sentence of the court below's unfair sentencing (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination ex officio (Changes in Indictment) 1) We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant.

A prosecutor shall apply Article 2 (2) 3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act to "Special Bodily Injury" among the names of the crimes against the defendant during the trial of the defendant, and Article 2 (2) 3 of the applicable Act to "This part of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc." shall be applied as follows:

Article 258-2(1), Article 257(1), Article 37(1), Article 37, and Article 38 of the Criminal Act apply for the amendment of a bill of amendment to the indictment. Since this Court permitted the amendment, the judgment below on this part cannot be maintained, and the charges of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint injury) should be sentenced to one punishment in relation to concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. As such, the part of the judgment below on the defendant cannot be maintained as it is.

2) However, despite the above reasons for reversal ex officio, the defendant's misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and assertion of mental and physical disorder are still subject to the adjudication of this Court.

B. Determination 1 on the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and legal principles ) In light of the fact that the relevant legal doctrine ought to be more weighted than the statement made to an investigation agency in accordance with the basic principle of criminal procedure, such as the trial-oriented principle and the substantial direct deliberation principle, a witness is not able to believe the witness’s legal statement.