The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

사실오인 피고인은 의자를 들었다가 논 후 4~5 걸음 정도 걸어서 벽 쪽에 있던 선풍기를 벽을 향해 찼고, 선풍기 날개의 앞덮개가 튕겨져 나오면서 우연히 피해자의 발에 스치거나 맞았다.

The defendant's act was not an exercise of physical force against human body, but did not have an intention to commit violence.

The punishment (fine 500,000) sentenced by the court below on unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

Judgment

Violence in a judgment of misunderstanding of facts refers to the exercise of physical tangible force against a human body, and it does not necessarily require any contact with a victim, and thus, in the event of an act to display or thrown away hand or things, as the victim may take a bath close to the victim, it constitutes violence as an exercise of unlawful tangible force against the victim, even though it did not directly contact the victim's body.

(See Supreme Court Decision 89Do1406 delivered on February 13, 1990). The Defendant asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal in this part of the judgment below, and the court below rejected the above assertion in detail on the lower court’s decision on the summary of evidence among the judgment.

Examining the circumstances presented by the court below in light of the aforementioned legal principles, the defendant's act of supporting the victim's right to the side immediately next to that of the victim, and the act of supporting the victim's right to the rear wind is an exercise of tangible force against the victim's body, and the defendant's intention is also recognized.

The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty is just, and there is no error of mistake of facts as alleged by the defendant.

Defendant’s assertion of mistake is not accepted.

In comparison with the judgment of the first instance court on the assertion of unfair sentencing, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing, and the sentencing of the first instance is reasonable.