The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, misunderstanding of facts, did not have expressed the victim’s desire to do so as to be the facts charged in this case, and rather, why the victim “if the victim would be distorted,”

Whether it is doubtful that a person's husband is not guilty of the bad will or not.

“The purpose of “” is to say that only the above facts charged were expressed, such as the statement in the above facts charged.

In addition, the defendant was led to the back of the victim in the process of making ditches with the victim, and there was no assault against the victim as stated in the facts charged in this case.

Nevertheless, the court below convicted the Defendant of the facts charged in this case, and it erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (1.5 million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in this case is as follows. The court below rejected and convicted the Defendant and the defense counsel's assertion of innocence.

[Mahinginging] The Defendant was one of the EF agricultural cooperatives located in Chungcheongnam-dong, Chungcheongnam-dong, Chungcheongnam-do around 16:37 on July 13, 2015, where the Defendant’s husband was dissatisfied with the Defendant’s her husband’s work at the victim F’s fireworks, one of whom is one of the employees and customers of Mart’s work and customers, “years, years, spawds, spawds,” and “any year?

When we look at the difference in the Republic of Korea, two arms are shakings by cutting down.

In other words, the victim was openly insulting by referring to a large sound, such as "a fluent year to which her husband is attached."

[2] The Defendant committed assault against the victim at the time and place set forth in paragraph 1, and by hand, committed assault against the victim by cutting down the back part of the victim F (at the age of 49) with his/her hands, pushing down his/her chest, and her chest.

B. Although the lower court denied the Defendant’s criminal act with the same purport as the allegation of mistake in fact, the lower court stated in its reasoning in its ruling that “the determination of the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion” was “the judgment.”