The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal by the defendant;

A. The Defendant did not assault G on the ground that the beer’s disease, which was found by the Defendant by mistake of fact, did not ear of the victim G.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts by finding the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of the instant case where the Defendant was frightening the victim of beer’s disease and assaulted the victim.

B. In light of the fact that the criminal defendant was not punished as a sentence, the victim did not have any damage, and the victim did not want the criminal punishment, the sentence of the court below that sentenced the two-year suspended sentence and the protection observation in the six-month imprisonment and the community service order for 80 hours is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

가. 사실 오인 주장에 대한 판단 폭행죄에 있어 서의 폭행이라 함은 사람의 신체에 대하여 물리적 유형력을 행사함을 뜻하는 것으로서 반드시 피해자의 신체에 접촉함을 필요로 하는 것은 아니다( 대법원 1990. 2. 13. 선고 89도 1406 판결 참조). 원심이 적법하게 채택하여 조사한 증거들에 의하여 인정할 수 있는 다음과 같은 사정들, 즉 ① 피해자 G는 “ 피고인이 종업원과 술값 문제로 말다툼을 하고 있어서 피고인에게 ‘ 웬만하면 계산하고 나가시지요 ’라고 말했더니 피고인이 저에게 욕설을 하였고, 피고인이 말다툼을 하던 중에 자리에서 일어나더니 테이블에 있는 맥주병을 들고 저를 향해 옆으로 날리듯이 던졌으며, 그 맥주 병이 제 귀 옆으로 휙 소리가 날 정도로 지나가서 카운터 쪽에 부딪혀 깨졌습니다

“The victim’s statement regarding the circumstances before and after the case was stated as “,” and the victim’s statement was specific; ② the Defendant denied at the lower court that the victim did not have been able to be able to do so, and, at the same time, the Defendant was deprived of beer’s disease on the side of the tables that the victim was seated.

3.2