The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The defendant does not have any misunderstanding of facts regarding the part of the victim's lecture.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the court below based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below regarding the assertion of mistake of facts: (i) the victim has consistently followed the part of the victim's care and made a statement from the investigative agency; (ii) E at the first time when the defendant and the victim appeared, as alleged by the defendant; (iii) the defendant reversed the victim's statement; and (iv) the defendant made a statement at the time when the crime of this case was committed; (v) although the defendant denied the part of the victim's care, he did not deny the fact that the victim was injured; and (iv) the witness at the scene of the defendant's dispute was not deemed to follow the part of the victim's care; (v) the victim's testimony was challenged with the defendant's friendship; and (v) the witness at the scene of the victim was challenged with the defendant; (v) the defendant's testimony was in favor of the defendant; and there was no sufficient reason to recognize the part of the defendant's testimony that is disadvantageous to the defendant; and (v) the defendant's oral statement was not made.

3. The defendant's decision on the assertion of unfair sentencing is two years of suspended sentence in October 203 and two years of suspended sentence in April 2004.