The guilty part of the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance and the judgment of the court of second instance are reversed, respectively.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a year.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In relation to the lower judgment of the second instance judgment (2016 highest 483), the Defendant unilaterally sustained an injury from O at the time, and did not incur an injury toO as stated in the facts constituting the crime of the lower judgment of the second instance.

B. As to the lower judgment of the first instance court (2015 high group 2597), the Defendant was in a state of mental disorder under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the crime.

(c)

The punishment of unfair sentencing (the first judgment of the court below: 10 months of imprisonment, 2 months of imprisonment: 6 months of imprisonment and 3 months of imprisonment) of the court below is too unreasonable.

2. Examination ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant for an ex officio judgment.

As to the Defendant, the first instance judgment, the second and third lower judgment were pronounced, and the Defendant appealed against the guilty part of the first instance judgment and the second and third lower judgment. The first instance court dismissed the public prosecution regarding the crime of assault among the facts charged in the instant case, and pronounced guilty of damage to property. Only the Defendant appealed against the convicted part of the lower judgment.

Therefore, since the first instance court's judgment dismissing the prosecution against the defendant was separated and confirmed as it is, only the guilty part of the judgment of the first instance court falls under the scope of the judgment of this court.

This Court decided to consolidate each appeal case. Each of the above judgments of the court below should be sentenced to a single punishment in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act in relation to concurrent offenses under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. Thus, the above judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it is.

However, notwithstanding the above reasons for reversal ex officio, the defendant's mistake and assertion of mental or physical disorder still are subject to the judgment of this court, and we will examine below.

3. Determination as to the assertion of mistake of fact (2016 order 483) as to the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, i.e., the victim of the original witness.