The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In relation to the facts of the lower judgment’s crime Paragraph 1, the Defendant: (a) was aware of the fact that the victim’s chest was satisfe one time within the toilet after the completion of the eating process on the day of the instant case; (b) however, there was no assaulting the victim at the vicinity of the entrance of the kitchen; (c) in relation to the facts of the crime of the lower judgment, the Defendant paid satisfs on the ground that the victim did not properly have a knife the knife, but there was no fact that the Defendant satisfs at the lower part below the knife

3) In relation to the facts constituting the crime of the lower judgment, although the Defendant was at the time of several times of the victim’s chests, there was no supporting that the victim’s clothes and the mouths are walking several times. 4) In relation to the facts constituting the crime of the lower judgment, in relation to the crime of paragraph 4 of the crime of the lower judgment, the Defendant paid a garment on the ground that cleaning of the restaurant was not clean, but there was no fact that the victim et al. al. were taken one time of drinking.

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

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the victim D has made a statement from the investigative agency to the court of the court below that he was subject to assault and intimidation as stated in the facts of the crime, and has made detailed and consistent statements about the time and method of assault and intimidation. Since the victim's statement is highly reliable, it is recognized that the defendant abused and threatened the victim, such as the facts of the crime of the court below.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

B. The elements of favorable sentencing, such as the fact that the defendant has no record of criminal punishment on the assertion of unfair sentencing, and deposited five million won for the victim, and the defendant's attempt to mislead the victim even though the victim did not go against the patrol vessel.