The judgment below

The guilty part shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three months.

Of the facts charged of this case, the victim.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the above legal principles, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, and instead convicted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged, despite the Defendant’s withdrawal of his wish to punish the Defendant at the lower court by mutual consent with the victim J., the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby failing to dismiss this part of the indictment.

B. Even if the defendant was guilty of an unfair sentencing, the sentence imposed by the court below (five months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Of the facts charged in this case’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the assault against the victim J cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s clearly expressed intent (Article 260(3) of the Criminal Act). Thus, when the victim did not wish to punish the defendant or withdraws his/her wish to punish the defendant, a judgment dismissing the public prosecution shall be rendered pursuant to Article 327(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

According to the records of this case, the victim J expressed his wish to punish the defendant on April 4, 2017 after being investigated by the police, but submitted a written agreement stating that the defendant does not wish to punish the defendant on May 2, 2017, which was before the closure of pleadings in the court below, which was before the closure of pleadings in the court below. Thus, the court below should have rendered a judgment dismissing this part of the public prosecution pursuant to Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act, but the court below erred in finding the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, and therefore, the defendant's mistake or misapprehension of legal principles pointing this out has merit.

3. As seen above, the part of the judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty of the crime of assault against the victim J should be reversed. The above crime of assault should be sentenced to one sentence in the concurrent relation between the remaining crimes of the judgment of the court below and the crimes of assault under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. Thus, the above