The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In other words, the Defendant did not intend to get the victim by misunderstanding the facts or misunderstanding the legal principles, but intended to simply display or threaten the victim’s salary, and caused the victim’s head by negligence due to the inconvenience of the shoulder, etc.

의사봉 자체는 위험한 물건이라고 할 수 없는데, 피고인이 들고 있던 의사봉에 뾰족 한 부분이 있었기 때문에 피해자의 머리 부분에서 출혈이 발생하였다.

피고인은 일반적인 의사봉인 것으로 알고 있었고 의사봉에 뾰족 한 부분이 있다는 것을 알지 못하였으므로 피고인에게 특수 상해죄의 고의가 있다고

subsection (b) of this section.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of special injury is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts or legal principles.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (two years of suspended sentence in six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine the argument that there was no intention to make the defendant get the head part of the victim's salary by mistake of facts or misapprehension of the legal principle.

The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted by the court below and the trial court: (a) the defendant left the victim's head part of the victim's head on the ground that the defendant left the victim's body with the chair's seat; (b) the defendant saw the victim's body part on the ground of the defendant's arms and descendants length and the length of the doctor's salary; and (c) the victim saw the victim's head from the appropriate location; (d) the victim saw the victim's body part on the ground that the victim saw the victim's body part on the part of the victim's head; and (e) the victim saw the victim's body part on the part of the victim's head on the part of the victim'

The decision is judged.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

2) The following does not constitute a dangerous thing: