The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts (the part of injury against the victim C) is the date and time stated in the facts of the crime as stated in the judgment of the court below, when the defendant wants to enter the office room of the Nowon Police Station, the victim C merely takes the body of the victim who was in excess of the center and was in a far away from the center by putting the clothes of the defendant into the office of the Nowon Police Station. There is no intention that the victim was inflicted an injury on the victim by intentionally booming the head of the victim and walking the victim beyond the floor of the vehicle.

B. Legal principles (part of assault against victim G) each act committed by the defendant against victim G does not constitute assault against the crime of assault.

2. Determination

A. In light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, in particular, each statement at the court below of the victim C and witness H, and the circumstances leading up to the defendant's injury at the time when it can be known, the degree of injury inflicted on the victim and the Defendant's speech and behavior, etc., the defendant can sufficiently recognize the fact that he intentionally inflicted an injury on the victim as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment below

B. As to the assertion of misapprehension of legal principles, violence in the crime of assault under Article 260 of the Criminal Act refers to the exercise of all tangible force against human body, which causes physical pain (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Do5716, Jan. 10, 2003). While the Defendant dialogues with the victim G, the Defendant spawn act (Article 2014Daga273 of the facts charged in the case) and the victim demanded the victim to leave the office of the office of the defendant, the Defendant’s act of spawnizing the victim’s left shoulder, and continuously receiving water from water purifiers one time with the victim’s face (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Da5716, Jan. 10, 2003).