The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and improper sentencing)

A. Although there is a fact that misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles that the defendant forcibly taken the victim's property as stated in the facts of the crime in the judgment below, the victim did not have any injury, the crime of robbery is not established (misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles). (B) Even if the defendant's act of sentencing is found guilty, the sentencing of the court below (three years and six months) is excessively unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles 1) The injury of robbery refers to the injury of the victim’s completeness or physiological function.

In a case where there is extremely minor circumstance accompanied by a assault and thus there is no difficulty in treating the victim’s daily life, it may be said that the injury does not constitute an injury if the victim’s bodily and mental condition is extremely minor. However, this is premised on the fact that there is no assault to the same extent as the wound that may normally occur during his/her daily life even if there is no assault, so if there is an injury, the injury should be caused by the assault. Whether the injury inflicted upon the victim’s physical and mental condition, such as the completeness or physiological function, should not be objectively and uniformly determined, but should be determined on the basis of the victim’s age, gender, physical and mental condition, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Do1726, Apr. 10, 2014). The diagnosis of injury to be submitted by the victim of the crime of injury is generally made by the doctor after identifying the cause of the injury on the basis of the victim’s statement, and the part and degree of the injury’s observation and judgment by mobilization, etc.