The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts did not follow C and alcohol, did not neglect C and intended C to take a bath, and did not have committed an attack or assault against C.

However, while the defendant tried to drink, there is no alcoholic beverage on the bar, and there is no alcoholic beverage on the ground floor, and there is only a shoulder of an empty cattle disease on the ground floor.

The crime of assault is not established if the fix is only a fix of the floor in which there is no person, and the fix is only a fix.

B. The prosecutor’s defendant has a record of having been punished several times for the same kind of crime.

In particular, it is not visible that there is an effort to agree with the victim or to agree with the victim.

There is no reason to take into account the circumstances leading to the Defendant’s crime, and there is no reason to deny the Defendant’s crime until the end.

Moreover, the Defendant committed the instant crime on the day when the term of punishment has been terminated due to the same crime, and there is no doubt that the instant crime was committed, and there is a high risk of recidivism.

In full view of these circumstances, the sentence imposed by the court below is too unfortunate and unfair.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts, the court below recognizes the fact that the defendant was faced with the victim, which is a dangerous object, and the assault includes the act of exercising force against a person directly or indirectly against the person who is an act of exercising force against a person. Thus, inasmuch as the defendant exercised force indirectly and indirectly against the victim by taking advantage of the disease, which is a dangerous object toward the victim, the above act constitutes a special assault crime even if the defendant directly left the victim and did not contact the victim.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. The Defendant on the prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing.