The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) is as follows: the Defendant unilaterally f from F to drinking and sprink out from F on the street before the instant case’s “E” house; the Defendant f was broken down by pushing the Defendant, and the Defendant f was at the bar, and f was to report the Defendant, and f was in order to ask f to be involved in drinking f, but f was again f to go beyond F to ask her, and the Defendant was guilty of the Defendant, even though he did not assault F as stated in the facts charged in the instant case, even though he did not inflict any injury on him, the lower court erred by misapprehending facts.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the trial court: (i) “F knew that the Defendant was a person who fights with G, who was his wife, was fighting with G, and was going beyond the stairs in the course of the Defendant and flabing. On the floor, when the Defendant was flaged, the Defendant 2-3-out faceed.

이후 집으로 가기 위해 가게 뒷편 쪽으로 걸어가고 있는데, 피고인이 다가와 서로 욕을 주고 받으며 시비가 되어 멱살을 잡고 바닥을 뒹굴었고, 이때 자신의 처와 그 친구가 말려서 떨어지게 되었다” 는 취지로 수사기관 이래 당 심 법정에 이르기까지 일관되게 진술하고 있는데, F이 위와 같이 자신에게 불리한 진술도 하고 있는 점에 비추어 볼 때, F의 위 진술을 신빙할 만 한 점, ② 목 격자 G은 수사기관 및 원심 법정에서 “ 남편( ‘F’ 을 지칭한다) 이 밖에서 싸우고 있다는 말을 듣고 나가 보니, 계단 아래에서 피고인이 남편 위에 올라타서 주먹으로 때리고 있는 것을 보고, 자신이 피고인의 허리춤을 잡아끌었다.

Since then, the husband returned to the house as soon as possible, and the witness Hdo stated to the effect that the defendant was able to see and wald because two persons were able to drive behind, and that he was able to do so.