The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant did not have committed the victim as stated in the facts charged of this case, and that the victim was injured at the children’s house operated by the Defendant.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous and erroneous.

2. Determination

A. On February 23, 2015, the summary of the facts charged: (a) around 17:00 on February 23, 2015, the Defendant stated that the “D Child Care Center” operated by the Defendant located in Seo-gu, Seo-gu that the Defendant would face the victim’s face on the ground that the Defendant would not hear the horses of the victim; (b) on the other hand, the Defendant asked the victim’s face from the “D Child Care Center” operated by the Defendant located in Seo-gu, Seo-gu.

Accordingly, the Defendant committed physical abuse that damages to the body of a child or terminates the physical health and development of a child.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in the instant case on the ground of the evidence indicated in its holding (a witness G’s legal statement contrary to this, determined that the witness G made a false testimony contrary to his/her memory on behalf of the Defendant, who is the representative of the child care center.)

A thorough examination of the above judgment of the court below in light of the records of this case is justified. Thus, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

On the other hand, the witness N appeared as a witness in this court and stated to the effect that the defendant did not have any fact when the victim was injured on the ground that "the defendant was satisfed by another child with the victim, but the defendant was removed from his match without using goods or clothes, etc.".

However, on February 27, 2015, the said witness made a statement to the effect that “the Defendant saw that she would not leave the damaged child and speak fighting.” On the other hand, around May 2017, the Defendant divided a conversation by contact with the witness N around May 2017.