The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of a special injury even though the defendant was not guilty of the victim due to the son's disease or the son's disease was erroneous, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The punishment of the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. On April 10, 2016, the Defendant: (a) while drinking alcohol at the point of “E” located in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, U.S., U.S., U.S. on April 10, 2016; (b) the son was seated by the Defendant F.F. (28 years old); and (c) the victim resisted against this, the Defendant her neck, which was a dangerous object on the table, and her son f.e., the victim f., her head f., the victim f.e., the victim f., her head f.

The defendant continued to gather the main disease, which is a dangerous thing that had been located therein, and got off the victim's head head by several times and prevented the victim from doing so.

The Defendant carried dangerous things with the victim, thereby causing injury to the victim, such as cutting down the body of the fingers, which requires approximately four weeks of medical treatment.

B. Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined in the judgment of the court below and the trial of the party, it was proved to the extent that there was a reasonable doubt as to the fact that the defendant was injured by the victim due to the remaining after the crime of this case or the illness at the time of the crime of this case.

It is difficult to see it.

① The Defendant stated in the police and the prosecutor’s office that “the victim was not memoryd about the part of the victim when the victim was the victim’s son or son’s disease, but there is no fact that the victim was the victim’s son or son’s disease.” The Defendant’s statement at the time of the victim’s police statement was the only direct evidence on the fact that the Defendant was the victim’s son or son’s disease, and the victim was the victim’s remaining son.