All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) There is no misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (the part concerning the crime of oil) Defendant did not assault the victim by scket and scam.

B) In light of the victim’s legal statement to the effect that “the Defendant had a swayed, but avoided it,” the Defendant’s act does not constitute “Assault.” C) taken the Defendant’s first stage of demonstration without any permission, and the victim continued to take the photograph, even though the Defendant said that the Defendant would not take the photograph of the victim.

Due to these circumstances, the defendant was threatened with the victim, which constitutes self-defense.

2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one million won of fine) is too unreasonable and unfair. B. The prosecutor’s 1) mismisunderstanding of facts (not guilty part) the victim consistently stated that he/she abused himself/herself by drinking, and the statement is sufficiently reliable.

However, the court below acquitted the defendant of this part of the facts charged on the ground that it is not enough to recognize that the statement by the victim alone without any reasonable reason constitutes an assault against the victim by drinking.

The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts against the rules of evidence and affecting the judgment.

2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one million won of a fine) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In determining the credibility of a statement after the first instance court proceeded with the witness examination procedure in the criminal trial procedure on the part of finding facts concerning the defendant's misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, there are various circumstances where it is difficult to record the witness examination protocol, such as whether the contents of the statement itself conforms to the rationality, logic, morality or rule of experience, evidence or third party's statement, and whether it conforms to evidence or third party's statement after being sworn in the presence of a judge, such as the appearance or attitude of the witness, and the penation of the statement in the open court.