The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court convicted the Defendant of the facts charged, misunderstanding of the legal doctrine, although the Defendant committed a misunderstanding of the victim’s chest part, the Defendant’s act did not result in injury as described in the facts charged, and the difficulty in recognizing the probative value of the submitted diagnosis was also difficult. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

B. The sentencing of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

가. 사실 오인 등 주장에 관한 판단 1) 원심의 판단 원심은 그 채택 증거를 종합하여 인정되는 다음과 같은 사정, 즉 ① ‘ 피고인이 피해자를 밀쳐서 바닥에 넘어졌다’ 는 점에 관하여는 피고인과 피해자의 진술이 일치하고 있고, 피고인은 경찰조사에서 ‘ 당시 피해자가 주저앉아 엉덩방아를 찧었다’ 고 진술하기도 한 점, ② 피해자는 사건 당일 F 병원에 가서 좌측 엉덩이 및 대퇴부의 타박상 등의 진단을 받았고, 진료 기록부에서 피해자가 처음 진료를 받을 당시에도 타인에 의하여 넘어졌다고

In full view of the fact that the records explained by the defendant are discovered, and the fact that the defendant's act committed an injury, such as the description of the facts charged, can be recognized, in light of the fact that if the elderly victim was in the state of her stuffed with the goods, the probability that her tam is likely to be in the her part

The decision was determined.

2) The written injury diagnosis submitted by the victim of the crime of injury for deliberation at the time, which generally grasps the cause of injury on the basis of the victim’s statement, and includes the part and degree of injury through mobilization of medical expertise to observe and determine by mobilization of the victim, and it is insufficient to be evidence to directly prove that the injury as stated therein was caused by the Defendant’s criminal act. However, the injury is injury.