The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal by the defendant;

A. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged based on the respective statements of C and D, but C’s statement is more consistent with the Defendant’s defense, and it is difficult to believe D’s statement contrary to the empirical rule.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts, the Defendant appeared as a witness of the Seoul Western District Court case No. 2014 High Court Decision 2064 against A, and stated to the effect that “C has no record of D”, and C also made a statement to the same effect.

However, the court below duly adopted and examined the following facts or circumstances, namely, ① the defendant: (a) the defendant went before D and C; (b) following D and C followed; (c) the defendant was sent back to D and D by driving a police box (see, e.g., records of evidence 44); (d) while C made a statement to the effect that “the defendant was going out of D and C after the defendant was forced to go out of D and C. It was difficult to go out of D and C.” (see, e4 pages of evidence records) to the effect that “the defendant was unable to go out of C and D.” (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 54 pages); (b) the defendant was not able to go out of C and C’s statement on the process of fighting; (c) the process of fighting started; (d) the defendant did not appear when D and C did not appear (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 47Do47).