The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although it is true that gasolineers were used at the time of the judgment of the court below in the misconception of facts, there was no act as Raz had been done as Razer on the left-hand machine, since Raz had been in the main machine on the left-hand side.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below's decision on the assertion of mistake of facts, namely, ① public officials F who were at the scene from the investigation stage to the court below, and I consistently stated that the defendant was a gasoline in his hand, and the other hand and acting as if he were to put him, ② the defendant also recognized the fact that he was a gasoline in one hand, and the defendant stated in the investigation stage that he did not accurately memory the other hand (Evidence 38 pages of evidence records) at the time, ③ the defendant did not want to put him at any time as a public official because he opened a lid lid or a rater, and thus, he did not want to put him at any time. However, at the time, the defendant was able to put him in a dangerous situation in light of the fact that the defendant was unable to put him in a lid, and even if he did not have any other hand, he could put him in a dangerous condition in his official duty.

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

B. On the other hand, the lower court also held that public officials F in charge of determining unreasonable sentencing did not want punishment against the Defendant.