The judgment below

The part of the case of the defendant is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

A person who has filed a medical care and custody application.

1. The part of the defendant case

A. The summary of the grounds of appeal 1) In light of the fact-misunderstanding, misunderstanding of the legal principles, and the fact that the defendant brought the victim again after a certain period of time has elapsed since he was sentenced to contingent injury, and subsequently paid the victim money, it cannot be deemed that the defendant used the victim under the plan for taking property from the beginning, and that the defendant did not think of the situation of suppressing the victim's resistance.

It is reasonable to view it.

Therefore, there is a concurrent crime of assault and bodily injury resulting from robbery, not the crime of injury resulting from robbery.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (4 years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Determination 1) In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of misunderstanding of the legal principles, namely, the defendant was injured by the victim who was aware that he would not sell goods to the victim, and the victim was injured by the right-hand skeing the victim's right-hand go beyond the floor, and the witness F instructed the defendant several minutes, and the defendant went back to the victim's operation. At that time, the victim was not injured, and the victim was not injured by the victim, and the defendant was sounded by the victim of the defect he wanted to go out of the goods, and the defendant was 5,000 won, her mother, was her mother, and the defendant exercised an assault to the extent that it is impossible to resist the victim, and the defendant acquired the property by using the victim's anti-competing state formed by the above assault.

I would like to say.

Therefore, the crime of bodily injury resulting from robbery is established against the defendant, and the defendant's payment of some money after taking property by force does not interfere with the establishment of the crime of bodily injury resulting from robbery.

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

2) Illegal assertion of sentencing.