The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant, as a misunderstanding of facts, did not inflict an injury upon the victim’s face by drinking, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (2 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The court below rejected the above assertion by the defendant as to the assertion of mistake of facts in the court below's assertion as to the same ground for appeal of this case, and the court below explained the defendant's assertion and its decision in the lower part in the summary of the evidence of the court decision. If we look at the above judgment of the court below in detail compared with the records, the judgment of the court below is just, and there is an

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court’s determination on the unfair argument of sentencing, and where the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court’s judgment as the materials for new sentencing have not been submitted in the trial, on the grounds that there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court’s judgment, and in full view of the reasons for sentencing revealed in the present argument in the instant case, the lower court’

It does not appear.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200Da36424, Apr. 2, 200).