The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of the grounds of appeal 1) The lower court’s determination that found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged in the following respect: (a) misunderstanding of facts and misapprehending of legal doctrine.

① Since the Defendant was notified of the same facts as the instant facts constituting the crime and the effect of the above notification disposition is not consistent with the facts constituting the instant crime, the Defendant shall be sentenced to acquittal.

(2) Although the defendant displayed a sentry's disease, he/she exercised the force against the victim.

Since it is not displayed in the nearest distance, a special crime of violence is not established.

2) The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (one million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly admitted and investigated, the lower court’s judgment that found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged is justifiable.

① The statements made by the victim that the Defendant satisfyddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd

The defendant did not contact the victim's face.

Even if the victim suffered a threat due to his/her body, he/she can be evaluated as exercising the physical force of the victim.

② It is true that the Defendant was subject to a disposition of notification due to disturbance of drinking alcohol, etc. on June 22, 2017 (which means seven pages of investigation records). The crime of the above notification is about the act of smoking while under the influence of alcohol at the same place on June 22, 2017, even though the Defendant was compelled to return home to a police officer who was dispatched after receiving a report of 112, who was committed the instant crime.