The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant did not commit any assault against the victim D.

However, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. Even if the court below found the defendant guilty, it is unfair that the sentence imposed by the defendant (amounting to KRW 700,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. On December 8, 2015, at around 10:00, the Defendant rejected a request from the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Gwanak-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City Gwanak-gu Office for the victim D (62 years old) who was the managing director at the time to present the original meeting and the original minutes of the meeting, and assault the victim by means of breathing the victim’s breath by hand and spathing the bat.

B. For the following reasons, the instant facts charged was proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt for deliberation.

It is difficult to see it.

1) A witness D’s statement in the court of the court below, a statement in the interrogation protocol of the suspect to the defendant prepared by the assistant judicial police officer, a statement in the protocol of testimony to D prepared by the assistant judicial police officer, and a statement in the written complaint to the defendant are the unilateral statements of the victim or are based on such statements, and there was an assault against the defendant, the relation between the victim and the victim, and the victim’s complaint.

Since December 8, 2015, it is difficult to believe that the victim's attitude, etc. is difficult to view.

2) Each entry in a medical certificate of injury, medical expenses statement, reply note of fact to E member, copy of medical records, etc. is not a direct evidence of the fact of assault or injury itself, but merely indicates the opinion that the victim was in a superior condition by external force as a result of the medical examination (see Supreme Court Decision 82Do3021, Feb. 8, 1983). Therefore, it cannot be readily concluded that the cause of injury was caused by the Defendant’s assault (see Supreme Court Decision 82Do3021, Feb. 8, 1983).