The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The degree of injury of the victim E caused by the instant misunderstanding of fact (the degree of injury to the victim E) is limited to “the base and left-hand sponsed spons on both sides” and appears to be able to be naturally cured only by stable medical treatment and flexible intake for about one week, and therefore, even though it is difficult to see that it constitutes “injury” in the crime of injury, the judgment of the court below convicts the victim E of the injury on a different premise, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) In regard to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts, the injury of the relevant legal doctrine means impairing the completeness of the body of the victim or impairing the physiological function of the victim.

In light of the above legal principles, if a wound accompanied by a assault is extremely minor and so there is no obstacle to natural therapy and daily life, it does not constitute the injury of the crime of injury. However, if a wound beyond such a degree is caused by an assault, it shall be deemed that the injury is caused by the assault. Whether the physical integrity of the victim was damaged or the physiological function was caused by the assault shall not be determined objectively and uniformly, but shall be determined on the basis of the victim’s age, gender, body, physical and mental specific condition, etc. (see Supreme Court Decisions 2005Do1039, May 26, 2005; 9Do4305, Feb. 25, 2000).