The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, as a dangerous object, had the victim E, injured the victim E and damaged the vehicle due to the decline.

However, as stated in the facts of the crime of the lower judgment, the Defendant committed the above crimes, not by taking away the hackk in possession of the Defendant’s hackk, but by taking the hackk around.

B. The sentencing (one year and four months) of the lower court’s improper sentencing (one year and four months) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the defendant, as stated in the facts of the crime of the court below, can find the facts that the defendant inflicted an injury on the victim E and damaged the vehicle, by taking out the defendant's hackk's h

Even if the defendant alleged, he committed the above crimes because he collected hacks around the defendant.

Even if the defendant committed a crime of bodily injury or damage by carrying a dangerous article, it does not affect the establishment of a crime of special injury or special damage.

Therefore, the court below did not err by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the judgment.

B. The Defendant agreed with the victim E on the wrongful argument of sentencing.

However, since three months have not passed since the execution of the final sentence was completed, the Defendant committed the crime of injury or damage due to the hacks, which is a dangerous object, and accordingly, the victim suffered multiple ties in need of medical treatment for about three weeks.

The method and method of crime are dangerous, and the result is not easy.

In full view of the following circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the offense, means and consequence, etc., and the fact that there is no special circumstance or circumstance to change the sentencing of the lower court after the lower judgment, the lower court’s sentencing is not unfair.

3. The Defendant’s appeal is without merit, and thus, the Criminal Procedure Act.