The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. There was no assault against the victim as stated in the facts charged in the instant case by mistake of facts.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged by comprehensively taking account of the evidence presented in its holding.

In light of the above legal principles, the following circumstances acknowledged by the court below in accordance with the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, ① the victim made a statement corresponding to the facts charged in this case from the investigative agency to the court of the court below, which is consistent and specific, as well as consistent and detailed, and the explanation of circumstances is reasonable, and ② the statement in the F investigative agency (which was in the currency with the victim, the victim was a secret statement of the victim, and the statement in the F investigative agency was made.

이 자식이 발로 찼어.

In other words, the judgment of the court below is just and there is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts alleged by the defendant, in full view of the following facts: (a) the injury described in the injury diagnosis document corresponds to the victim's statement; and (b) the part and degree of injury also conforms to the situation of damage the victim's statement.

subsection (b) of this section.

B. The Criminal Litigation Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the principle of direct determination on the unfair argument of sentencing, has the unique area of the first instance judgment as to the determination of sentencing, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance judgment, and the first instance judgment does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Even if the materials submitted in the trial at the first instance court were submitted, there is no meaningful change in the terms of sentencing compared to the lower judgment, and the lower court’s reasonable scope of discretion is limited in full view of all the reasons for sentencing specified in the records of the instant case.