The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case on the ground that the injured party of the grounds of appeal did not commit an assault as stated in the facts charged of this case, although he did not have committed an act of assault against the injured party, while he did not cause the fluor and the defendant's fluor by taking the defendant's hand.

Therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. In determining the credibility of the statements made by the victim, etc. supporting the facts charged, the court shall not without permission dismiss the statements made by the victim, etc. in light of the following circumstances: (a) whether the contents of the statements themselves conform to the rationality, logic, inconsistency, or rule of experience; (b) whether the evidence or third party’s statement conforms to the witness evidence or evidence; and (c) the appearance and attitude of the witness who is going to the public in the open court after being sworn before a judge; and (d) the appearance and appearance of the witness who directly observe various circumstances that make it difficult to record in the witness examination protocol, etc. after being sworn; and (e) evaluate the credibility of the statements made by the witness including the victim (see Supreme Court Decisions 2008Do7917, Jan. 30, 209; 2004Do362, Apr. 15, 2005; and (e) whether the statements made by the witness conforms to the facts charged; and (e) whether the evidence duly admitted from the victim and the following facts charged cannot be accepted (see Supreme Court Decision 2012636.

And according to the statements of the victim, the facts charged in this case can be sufficiently recognized.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

1) The victim may dispute between the Defendant and the victim from an investigative agency to the court below’s trial.