The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant of mistake of facts did not decentralization the victim’s nutrition toward the victim, and even if the victim’s nutrition was received, the Defendant does not intentionally accept the victim.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The judgment of the court below on the assertion of mistake of facts also asserted that the defendant made the same argument in the court below, and the court below argued that ① the victim and her husband D testified that the victim and her husband D appeared to have a vegetative substance in an investigative agency and this court, protruding the victim's face, and made a relatively consistent statement on the core part because the defendant stated that the victim would have been a victim, ② the defendant spreads vegetative agents around the trees of this case, and later the defendant seems to have spread vegetative agents to the victim, ③ the defendant was able to take a vegetative substance toward the victim. However, the victim and her husband stated that the defendant appeared to have a vegetative substance from the vegetative weapon when the victim was the victim, and that the defendant was aware that the vegetative substance from the vegetative face of the victim, and that the defendant was not able to have a vegetative substance or vegetative substance from the victim's face.