The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, misunderstanding the legal principles or misunderstanding the victim's face, the defendant was an empty baby who was placed on the table of the victim's table, so that the body can be protruding away from the victim's face. Since the face of the victim is not a major disease, there was no intention of special injury to the victim.

B. The Defendant, at the time of committing the instant crime, was in a state of mental and physical loss or mental weakness by drinking alcohol.

(c)

The sentence of the court below (six months of imprisonment) against the illegal defendant in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination

A. Before the judgment on the grounds for appeal, the prosecutor examined ex officio the part of the facts charged in the instant case in the judgment of the court below, and at the same time, the prosecutor tried to see the part of the facts charged in the instant case as follows: “The Defendant,” on April 30, 2017, on the ground that the victim F (72 years of age) was slickly drinking at “E cafeteria” located in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, Seoul Metropolitan Government, on the ground that the Defendant f (72 years of age) was slickly drinking, and caused the Defendant to go on the victim’s left face, and put the victim to sleep the number of days of treatment.

Accordingly, the defendant carried dangerous objects and inflicted an injury on the victim.

“Application for Amendments to Bill of Indictment was filed to the effect that it was changed to “,” and since this Court permitted it, the judgment of the court below became impossible to maintain it as it is in this respect.

B. However, inasmuch as the Defendant’s mistake, misunderstanding of legal principles, and assertion of mental and physical disorder are still subject to the judgment of this court, it will be examined as above.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. We examine the judgment of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, and the following circumstances that can be acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below and the court below. In other words, the victim appeared in the court below as a witness and the defendant saw the table as a main soldier.