The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Even if the victim’s statement is based on the victim’s statement, it is difficult to view that the Defendant inflicted an injury on the victim F, as stated in the facts charged, in light of the following: (a) it is unclear the cause of the victim’s bodily injury; and (b) there is a possibility that the victim with conflicting interests with the Defendant made a statement unfavorable

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles.

B. In light of the fact that the Defendant was hospitalized due to the instant case, the sentence of the lower judgment (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following facts or circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court as to the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal doctrine, the lower court’s judgment convicting the Defendant of this part of the facts charged is justifiable and it did not err by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument cannot be accepted.

① The victim F consistently stated in the investigative agency and the court of the court below that “The victim F was plucked and plucked of the victim’s hand,” and consistently stated in the investigative agency and the court of the court below that “the victim’s hand was plucked by the victim’s hand and plicked the victim’s hand, and attempted to repeat the victim’s hand.”

(F) The police interrogation protocol on F No. 10 of the lower court’s statement and evidence record No. 10 of the evidence record). (2) The defendant, who was a party and witness of this case, also appears to be a witness in a way consistent with the court below’s “the court below’s decision,” and the victim took a beer and beer, and the defendant did so.