All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The Defendant, as alleged in the facts charged, did not threaten the victim’s R in knife (2016 order 1887). There was no fact that the Defendant damaged the laundr of the laundry entrance operated by the victim V (2016 order 1969). (2) The lower court’s unfair sentence of sentencing (1 year and six months, fine 300,000 won, and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s above sentence is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. The following circumstances are acknowledged by the lower court of the special intimidation part and the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the depth of the party, i.e.,: (a) the victim R was at the police station’s seat at the front and rear 30 parts before the main place in front of the main place, and at the back of the head, the male who was engaged in the knife with the knife knife in the left hand, and reported the fact of the damage to the police (No. 20 pages of the evidence record No. 3). In full view of the following circumstances, the victim R made a concrete statement on the fact of damage: (b) according to the evidence of the lower court and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court of the first instance; (c) the Defendant knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knif.

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

B. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, namely, ① the person who first reported the witness interest, Y considered the Defendant’s photograph at the police station to be the offender, and ② the above Y found in the police station that the male, who appears to have a large face to be a restaurant on the side at the entrance of the terminal, is going to have a laundry door.

laundry is on Sundays.