The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Although the summary of the grounds for appeal did not contain buckbucks by the Defendant, the lower court convicted the Defendant of the instant facts charged, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged.

2. On the grounds of appeal, since the facts charged in the instant case are proven guilty for the following reasons, the judgment of the court below that found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in the instant case did not err by misapprehending the facts.

1) As the victim’s investigative agency and the court below’s legal statement were made as evidence directly corresponding to the facts charged in the instant case, there are no circumstances to suspect the credibility of the victim’s statement, such as the victim’s oral and consistentness, and there are no objective facts inconsistent with the objective facts.

2) There are objective circumstances supporting the credibility of the victim’s statement as follows.

A) On October 31, 2016, the day after the crime of this case was committed, the victim was conducted a diagnosis on the fact that “the victim is required to undergo two-day medical treatment by entering the left left side side of the case,” and the doctor G provided the victim’s medical treatment at the time, reply to the investigative agency’s inquiry as to what is the cause of the injury to the victim, and whether the form of credit is an animal as soon as the victim’s quickly (Evidence No. 61 b). At the time of the crime of this case (Evidence No. 61 b) the victim was discovered with ice to the effect that it appears to be shakings of the left side of the place where the victim was suffering, such Luxembourg and the location of the victim’s upper part (Evidence No. 54 through 57 3). On the other hand, the victim’s oral statement that “the victim was 1,000,000,000 from the veterinarian of this case.”