The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The defendant does not inflict any injury on the victim.

B. The upper part of the victim suffered by misunderstanding the legal doctrine is naturally and naturally cured in a short period, and thus does not constitute the concept of injury in the crime of injury.

(c)

Even if the lower court’s punishment (three years of suspended execution, observation of protection, and community service order 80 hours in June) is excessively unreasonable, even if it is not recognized as misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles regarding sentencing.

2. Determination

A. 1) The appellate court under the current Criminal Procedure Act has the nature of the so-called ex post facto review based on the inner conviction, but also has the nature of ex post facto review based on considerable parts of the ex post facto core elements. Therefore, in determining the legitimacy of the judgment of the first instance in the appellate court, the characteristics of the structure of such instance should be considered.

Therefore, in the event that the appellate court did not have any objective reason to affect the formation of a documentary evidence in the trial process, but intends to re-examine the first deliberation decision after the ex post facto determination, there are reasonable circumstances to deem that the first deliberation decision was clearly erroneous, or that the argument leading to the acknowledgement of facts is considerably unfair due to the violation of logical and empirical rules, etc. In addition, the appellate court should not reverse without any such exceptional circumstance the judgment on the acknowledgement of facts in the first deliberation.

(2) According to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts affecting the conclusion of the judgment, based on the following circumstances: (a) the principle of court-oriented trials that the conviction and innocence regarding the substance of a criminal case ought to be formed through a legal trial; and (b) the principle that only the evidence directly examined in the presence of a judge should be the basis of a trial (see Supreme Court Decision 2016Do18031, Mar. 22, 2017).