The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of one million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. 항소 이유의 요지( 사실 오인) 피고인이 피해자의 팔에 손을 댄 적은 있으나 공소사실 기재와 같이 피해자의 팔을 꺽고 밀어 넘어뜨린 사실은 없다.

2. The Defendant asserted the aforementioned purport in the lower court’s judgment as to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts.

The lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion through the examination of the witness against the victim, CCTV video CDs (33 pages of evidence records) reproduction, viewing, etc., and convicted the Defendant of the facts charged in this case.

According to the video of CCTV CDs, the victim 21:09:22 sets up on the left-hand side of the screen at around 21:09:22, and the defendant 21:09:28 up on the left-hand side of the screen and set up the victim's shoulder and return the victim's shoulder to the defendant, and then go beyond the victim's lock.

Therefore, we affirm the judgment of the court below and there is no error by mistake of facts as alleged by the defendant.

Defendant’s assertion is not accepted.

3. Determination ex officio on sentencing

(a) The court of appeals on the necessity of ex officio determination may only the grounds for appeal included in the petition of appeal or the statement of reason for appeal submitted within the period for submission of the statement of reason for appeal;

However, as long as the appeal is lawful, the court of appeals shall judge the grounds for ex officio investigation not included in the petition of appeal or the statement of reason submitted within the period for submission of the written reason for appeal (proviso of Article 361-4(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act). Here, the grounds for ex officio investigation referred to in this context include not only the application of statutes or statutory interpretation, but also obvious misunderstanding of facts and unfair sentencing (see, e.g., Supreme Court Order 2002Mo338, May 16, 2003; Supreme Court Order 2000Mo564, Mar. 30, 2006). The defendant only misunderstanding of facts against the judgment of the court below, but it examines changes in the conditions of sentencing compared with the judgment of the court below.

B. The instant crime is determined.