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. Although misunderstanding of facts was due to the fact that the victim abused the victim first, the court below recognized that the defendant abused the victim on the ground that the defendant was not able to speak, which was erroneous in the judgment of the court below, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding of facts.

B. Even if an unreasonable sentencing is acknowledged, the sentence of the lower court against the Defendant (two months of imprisonment and one year of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable in light of the circumstance and present situation of the Defendant’s occurrence of the instant crime, etc.

2. Determination:

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the circumstance where the defendant and the victim did not know the horses may be sufficiently recognized as one of the causes causing the instant crime.

In addition, according to Article 361-5 subparagraph 14 of the Criminal Procedure Act, in a case where the mistake of facts has affected the judgment, the grounds for appeal against the judgment of the court below may be deemed to be the grounds for appeal. However, the facts at this time refer to the facts requiring strict certification, and the mistake of facts, which is the basis for sentencing, does not constitute this. The circumstance that “the fact that the victim was assaulted first by the defendant, which led to the instant crime,” alleged by the defendant, is merely the basic facts for sentencing, and does not constitute facts requiring strict certification, such as facts prosecuted, and thus, does not constitute a fact requiring a criminal

This is not the reason for appeal of mistake of facts.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. In light of the parts and photographs of the victim’s standing position and photographs, etc., the degree of damage is not less than that of the victim, and the procedure for recovery of damage up to the trial, etc., did not reach an agreement with the victim.