The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The judgment of the court below regarding the crime of assault among the facts charged of this case is prosecuted.

1. Of the facts charged in this case, the lower court dismissed the public prosecution as to insult, and the Defendant appealed only on the ground of unreasonable sentencing, and the prosecutor did not appeal the dismissal of the public prosecution as to the conviction portion. As such, the dismissal of the public prosecution by the lower court became final and conclusive separately, and only the conviction portion falls under the scope of the trial by this

2. The summary of the grounds for appeal (four months of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

3. The judgment appears to have recognized the defendant's mistake and against the defendant's father, the victim D, who is the father of the defendant, does not want to be punished by the defendant. It is advantageous to the fact that the defendant agreed with F, the defendant is punished by the fine for the damage of public goods due to the damage of property in 2006 and 2008, the police box in 209, which was investigated in 209, and the fine for the damage of public goods due to the damage of public goods, etc., the police officer who took a bath in 2013, and was punished by the offense of insult for the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties in 2014. The defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 4 months for obstruction of performance of official duties on January 2014, and the defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 1 year for the crime of this case during the suspended sentence period, and there is no reason for the judgment of the court below to find the defendant's punishment too unreasonable.

4. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed pursuant to Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. The judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of the indictment as to the insult of the facts charged in the instant case, and it is ordered to correct it in accordance with Article 25 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.