The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (1) The fact that the defendant prevented the victim from resisting against the victim and forced withdrawal of property from the victim is consistent, but the victim suffered the victim's wife is derived from his own act in the process of suppressing the defendant and pursuing the defendant who seeks to flee, and thus, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, even though it is not attributable to the defendant as a result of the defendant's act.

(2) It is true that the defendant suffered bodily injury in the course of committing the crime of this case. However, it is extremely minor that the injured party suffered from the injury, and there is no need to treat the injured party, even if the injured party did not receive medical treatment, it does not interfere with daily life, and the injured party's physical health condition is naturally cured with the passage of time, and it is difficult to see that the injured party's living function is not damaged or that the injured party's life function is not impeded. Thus, the court below convicted the defendant of the crime of bodily injury resulting from robbery. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the injury in the crime of bodily injury resulting from robbery.

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

2. Determination

A. (1) Whether a proximate causal relationship is recognized between the Defendant’s taking of force and the victim’s wife (A) the Defendant also asserted the same purport in the lower court in relation to the above part.

With regard to these arguments, the court below held that the crime of injury resulting from robbery is established, regardless of the taking or attempted taking of property, where the offender inflicts an injury or sustained an injury on another person at an opportunity to commit robbery (Supreme Court Decision 86Do1526 Decided September 23, 1986), and that the injury in the crime of injury by robbery is an opportunity to commit robbery.