The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) is that the injured person is well aware of the head of the drunk while communicating with the accused, and there is only the fact of salking the back part of the victim's head by his/her fingers so that the injured person can get the salute into his/her fingers, and there is no fact of saluting the victim's head with the intention of assault.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, namely, the victim suffered bodily injury due to the Defendant’s assault.

Although an exaggerated statement was made, it was consistently made by the investigative agency to the court of original trial by the defendant, not by the degree of unfreshing, but by three times the back part of the head.

According to the record submitted by the victim, the defendant stated three times the victim's knee father at the time, knee father at least three times after the victim's knee father, and in the process, "I am at the time of head, so I would like to see so far as I am at the time of head."

In the same sense, the degree of physical contact was the same as that of a person under the influence of alcohol, and it was the degree that the degree of physical contact was freshed with the will of a person under the influence of alcohol.

It is difficult to see that the Defendant was knee in the first place, as the victim was knee, to talk with the victim at the time when the knee was knee in the first place.

In that sense, it seems that the victim would have been able to know about the body of the victim and not to hear the talk, and it was time to less than three times the back of the victim.

"The defendant made a statement", even according to his statement, when he first kneeed the victim's intention to shoulder the victim at the time of kneeing, his head is followed.