The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the injury inflicted on December 21, 2014 by mistake of fact, the Defendant did not engage in a scarcity that requires approximately two weeks of treatment on a part of a victim’s life booming twice by drinking in a day.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that found the Defendant guilty of the bodily injury on December 21, 2014 among the facts charged in the instant case was erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (an amount of KRW 3 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. On December 21, 2014, the Defendant: (a) around 810 Dong-dong, Seosung-gu, Daejeon Seodong-gu, Daejeon-dong 520-1, found the victim who was walking together with her son, and (b) took twice the victim’s life expectancy in order to care of her son; and (c) took two times the victim’s flusium in order to find out the victim who was walking together with her son; and (d) took care of her son from her son; and (e) took part in the victim’s flusium, the Defendant

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged by compiling the evidence in its judgment.

(c)

However, in light of the following circumstances, each statement of C, consistent with the facts charged, is difficult to believe, and the remaining evidence alone is insufficient to recognize this part of the facts charged.

① The victim, as between the Defendant and the married couple, filed a divorce lawsuit against the Defendant (No. 40th page of the record of the trial) under the Jinbu District Court High Court 2015 Down 61044. On December 21, 2014, the victim seems to have been preparing for the institution of the divorce lawsuit in question, following a serious conflict of opinions between the Defendant and the Defendant on the issue of bringing up children at the time of December 21, 2014.

② At the time of December 21, 2014, both the injured and the mother of the injured were on board the Defendant’s vehicle according to the leakage of the Defendant and the Defendant, who seeks to take care of their children.

According to the statement of the victim, the defendant is against this part of the facts charged.