The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. On August 29, 2015, the defendant found the victim's cell phone of the victim that he/she recorded a conversation with his/her former male or female mouth and paid the victim with scam, but there is no fact that he/she found the victim's scam with his/her hand.

Although the Defendant made a spitation to the victim on August 30, 2015, there is no fact that he spits or she spits the spite in the face of the victim or in his hand.

However, the lower court found the Defendant guilty on the grounds of each of the false statements between the victim and G.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is erroneous.

2. In full view of the evidence duly examined and adopted by the court below, including the statements of the victim with credibility as stated below, the defendant can sufficiently recognize the facts of assault as stated in each of the facts charged of this case, and thus, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is rejected.

The judgment of the court below that made the same conclusion is just, and there is no error of law by mistake of facts affecting the judgment.

The victim has consistently stated the content of damage from the police to the court in a very concrete and mutually consistent manner, and it is reasonable to explain the situation.

G) The contents of the witness G present at the court of the court below as a witness and the statement also conform to the victim’s statement (G)

However, in the court of the court below, it stated in the statement that "the case occurred during the school system of the defendant and the victim who are the scambling of the defendant and the victim did not go to the court and the investigative agency did not witness the crime, so that they want to conclude the case at a certain level because they did not go to the court, and therefore, they stated that the defendant did not witness the crime, but the facts are when the victim

The explanation on the background of the reversal of the G's statement is sufficient.