The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, at the time of misunderstanding the fact, was a fact that he was drinking in front of the victim at the time, but it was merely a fact that he was not able to participate in a fighting between the victim and the married couple at the time. In the case of a tree, the Defendant did not pose a threat to the victim by using his own will. The mobile phone is merely a fact that the Defendant used a mobile phone used by him at the time, and there was no use of any tangible power against the victim, and the lower court convicted the Defendant of the facts charged in the instant case even though he did not have any intent to assault the victim.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (one million won penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In the crime of assaulting a mistake of facts, the term “Assault” in the crime of assaulting a person’s body means exercising physical or mental pain. It does not necessarily require any contact with the victim’s body. The illegality should be determined by comprehensively taking into account the purpose and intent of the act, circumstances at the time of the act, mode and type of the act, the existence and degree of pain inflicted on the victim (see Supreme Court Decision 2016Do9302, Oct. 27, 2016). The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, namely, ① a person of a tree who is favorable to the victim by gathering a tree under his/her name, was pushed up in the front of the victim, and immediately after that, the Defendant took a threat against the victim’s body, and ② the Defendant seems to have expressed that he/she had expressed any desire to injure the victim before and after the act.