The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the ground of appeal No. 1 (the part concerning the principal facts charged)

A. The summary of this part of the facts charged is based on the premise that "the defendant committed physical abuse, such as cutting a child's arms, on the ground that the five-born child suffering from developmental disability as a child-care center disability teacher without properly arranging play tools. 2) The court below, in determining the standards for children's decoration, has various considerations such as specific circumstances, characteristics and age of the child, and degree of development, etc., in which the salutism for the children with developmental disability occurs, and the development of the salutism depends on the current state-sustaining education on the part of the children with disability, while the salutism is not smooth, it is difficult to view that the defendant's act was detrimental to the health of the child or not guilty on the day of this case's normal development, based on the facts as stated in its reasoning, and it is difficult to view that the defendant's act was committed on the same day as the child's act was committed on the day of the first instance court's normal development."

B. Article 17 Subparag. 3 of the former Child Welfare Act (amended by Act No. 12361, Jan. 28, 2014) provides that “physical abuse subject to punishment” is “the act of abuse that damages a child’s body.”

Under the former Child Welfare Act, the case is "an abuse that causes harm to the body".