The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) is that the Defendant cut up the victim's fastening lock sofacing, but the Defendant did not take up the victim's fastening locking at the time of the victim's flight, as stated in the facts charged in the instant case, at the time of the victim's flight in stairs, and there is no fact that the Defendant was vainidine by getting the victim's fastening sofack.

Nevertheless, the lower court which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case erred by misapprehending the facts.

2. Determination

A. In the trial of a party, the ex officio judgment prosecutor applied the provision of the applicable law to “the injury by assault” as “Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act,” and applied law to “Article 262 and Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act” as “Article 262 and Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act,” and applied for permission to modify the indictment as stated in the facts charged as stated in “the summary of the facts charged and evidence” under the facts charged. Since this court permitted this and changed its subject to the judgment, the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained in this respect.

The defendant's assertion of misunderstanding the facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, despite the above reasons for reversal. Therefore, the following is examined.

B. The judgment of the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts is acknowledged based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated, i.e., ① the victim’s statement as to whether he is the first column of stairs or the third partitions is inconsistent. However, from the investigation agency to the court below, the defendant consistently stated from the investigation agency to the court below that he applied mutatis mutandis the victim’s vady to vady due to the victim’s vady diving, ② the victim complained of the pains after the occurrence of the instant case, ② the victim complained of the pains of the instant proposal, and the victim was diagnosed of the 5-day main frame of the right side, which requires treatment for 35 days, and the victim was subject to pharmacologic after being diagnosed of the 5-day main frame, and ③ the victim’s ladying is to the degree that the victim’s lady is to tear.