1. The judgment below is reversed.

2. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two months; and

3.However, from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles 1) An act of assaulting the victim by deceiving him/her, and an act of injuring him/her by committing beer diseases should be determined as to whether he/she is not guilty of each of the facts charged as substantive concurrent crimes.

2) There is no fact that the victim had attempted to injure the victim.

3) Since the victim did not have been ericker, there was no intention of injury.

4) They do not constitute dangerous articles by cryer and beer.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment, three years of suspended execution, and 40 hours of community service order) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The prosecutor of the judgment ex officio changed the name of the crime to “special injury” from “violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group, deadly weapon, etc.)” (Article 3(1), Article 2(1)3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, and Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act as “Article 258-2(1) of the Criminal Act” (Article 258-2(1) of the Criminal Act) with respect to the facts charged in the instant case at the trial.

The judgment of the court below is no longer maintained as the subject of the judgment was changed by this court's permission.

However, even if the judgment of the court below is based on the above reasons for reversal, the defendant's assertion of mistake is still subject to the judgment of this court.

B. Determination 1 on the assertion of misunderstanding the facts and legal principles 1) In light of the following circumstances acknowledged based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, namely, the Defendant’s act of taking a wound against the victim, and the act of causing a wound and injury to the same victim by having the same purpose at the same time and place, it is reasonable to view that the instant crime constitutes a crime of special injury.

2) The lower court duly adopted and investigated whether the Defendant was guilty of committing a serious injury to the victim.