The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant, as a misunderstanding of fact, has a string of the Victim’s arms and ropes, it cannot be viewed as an assault.

However, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (an amount of KRW 700,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the above legal principles, the court below stated that the crime of assault under Article 260 of the Criminal Act refers to the exercise of physical force against a person's body, and the exercise of physical force means the physical force that causes physical pain (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Do5716, Jan. 10, 203). In light of the above legal principles, the victim stated that "the victim was forced to leave the taxi due to the problem of the passenger's taxi fee, and the defendant tried to get aboard the taxi while getting off the taxi as the victim's arm's length and neck," (ii) the victim suffered bodily harm, such as salt and tension, which requires treatment between 14 days as of August 17, 2017, and (iii) the victim was also issued with a diagnosis certificate, and (iii) the victim's body and the victim's body can be determined by fully considering the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below.

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

B. There is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court as to whether the sentencing is unfair or not, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it, and even though the sentencing of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, the first instance judgment is somewhat different from the view of the appellate court.