1. The judgment below is reversed.

2. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for two years;

3.Provided, That it shall be for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Since the court below rendered a guilty verdict of the misapprehension of the legal principle as to the act of assault, the crime of assault is a crime of anti-psying and the victim submitted a written agreement stating that he does not want the punishment of the defendant before the court below rendered the judgment, the court below should have rendered a judgment

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below finding guilty of the facts charged of the assault of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two years of imprisonment, three years of suspended execution) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Judgment on misapprehension of legal principles

A. On July 19, 2019, the Defendant: (a) around 18:30 on July 19, 2019, on the street in front of North-gu G at port; (b) without any reason, the victim E of traffic accidents as stated in paragraph (1) of the facts constituting the crime of the lower judgment expressed in the lower judgment took a bath to the victim; (c) two times at the left side of the victim; and (d) pushed the chest by hand.

Accordingly, the defendant assaulted the victim.

B. The offense of assault under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under Article 260(3) of the same Act.

According to the records of this case, it is recognized that on October 29, 2019, prior to the pronouncement of the judgment of the court below, the victim submitted a written agreement to the court below that he did not want the punishment against the defendant, so the court below should have dismissed the prosecution against the facts charged of the assault of this case by judgment pursuant to Article 327 subparagraph 6

Nevertheless, the court below found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of the instant assault, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misapprehending the legal principles.

Therefore, the prosecutor's argument is justified.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal on the charge of assault among the facts charged in the instant case is with merit, and the lower court, including this part, punishs the Defendant in accordance with the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.