The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The injury suffered by the victims of the instant case due to mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is a possible natural therapy without any particular treatment and does not constitute an injury under the Criminal Act.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the injury of the victim means impairing the completeness of the victim’s body or impairing physiological functions.

In a case where there is extremely minor circumstance accompanied by a assault and thus there is no need for treatment, and there is no obstacle in natural therapy and daily life, it does not constitute the injury of the crime of bodily injury. However, this is premised on the degree of injury that is the same as that of the wound ordinarily likely to occur during the daily life even though there is no assault. Therefore, if a wound exceeding such degree is caused by assault, it shall be deemed that the injury is caused by the assault. Whether the physical integrity of the victim is damaged or a physiological function is not objectively and uniformly determined, but shall be determined on the basis of the victim’s age, gender, physical and mental specific condition, such as physical and mental condition

(2) The court below held that the victims of the instant case’s injury constituted injury under the Criminal Act on the ground that the victims’ health conditions were changed due to the poor condition of the victims, and that the injury was caused by the impairment of their living function. The court below determined that the victims’ injury constituted injury under the Criminal Act, taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the degree of injury did not interfere with their daily life and that the victims’ injury cannot be deemed as a minor situation that could have been natural therapy within a short time.

In full view of the aforementioned legal principles and evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error of misapprehending the legal principles or misconception of facts.

B. As to the assertion of unfair sentencing, the Defendant acknowledges both the instant crime itself.