The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The symptoms of the diagnosis of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles (1) with respect to B indicate that “the external wound must not be observed,” and B made a statement that only physical therapy was given during this framework. The degree of injury suffered by B cannot be deemed as an injury under the Criminal Act because it is minor to the extent that natural therapy is possible.

(2) The Defendant was trying to file a disturbance in an emergency room by B and F, and in the process, B and F assaulted the Defendant, and was only passive defense, such as spawnizing his arms and deviating from his job, in order to escape his assault.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (a fine of 500,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. On August 20, 2012, the Defendant: (a) around 01:30 on August 20, 2012, the facts charged in the instant case: (b) at an emergency room in the E Hospital where the Defendant, in Daegu-gu, is a security personnel; (c) on the grounds that the victim B (35) and F (42) request his mother to provide prompt medical care; (d) his mother; and (e) avoided disturbance, the Defendant was satisfing B’s chest by hand; and (e) satisfing F’s satch; and (e) assaulted F.

B. In the crime of injury in relation to the determination of whether to inflict an injury means that the injury inflicted upon the victim’s physical integrity or physiological function. Thus, even if the injury occurred in the course of assault, it is difficult to treat the injured party separately because the degree of the injured party’s body can be easily seen as a minor that may arise in his/her daily life. As such, in a case where it is difficult to deem that the injured party either harms the completeness of body or alters the state of health, it does not constitute the crime of injury (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2006Do8035, Feb. 22, 2007; 2010Do10305, May 26, 2011). The evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court.