The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the facts charged of this case where the defendant was guilty of inflicting bodily injury upon the victim, although the defendant did not know the victim.

2. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged by comprehensively taking account of the evidence as indicated in the judgment.

The victim’s statement, the purport of which corresponds to the facts charged in the instant case, is relatively consistent, specific, and natural from the investigative agency to the court of the court below, and is credibility in light of the following: (a) the witness F and G’s each court’s testimony that “the victim’s losses are faced with the victim’s liability by threateninging the victim,” consistent with the main part.

On the other hand, there are circumstances in which the defendant's statement, the purpose of denying the facts charged in this case, as a result of the examination of the false speech detection devices conducted by the investigative agency, appears to have

However, it is difficult to readily conclude that the results of the examination of false horses are consistent with the truth at all times, as well as to function as circumstantial evidence to measure the credibility of the statements made by the person subject to the examination, so the credibility of the victim’s statement that conforms to the facts charged in the instant case cannot be denied solely on the basis of the aforementioned examination results.

In full view of the statements of the victim, the certificate of injury diagnosis, and the photographs of the damaged body, the judgment of the court below which recognized the establishment of the crime of injury against the defendant is just and acceptable, and it does not seem to have any error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.