The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles on the grounds of appeal by the Defendant, this case was called out by the police officer by taking the desire of the Defendant without any justifiable reason and walking the Defendant’s drinking, and threatening the Defendant. The victim D made the police officer a false statement that he did not want the Justice. As such, it was caused by the Defendant’s fault, and thus, the Defendant was acquitted.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

The punishment sentenced by the court below (the amount of 500,000 won) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake or misapprehension of legal principles, the court below is just in the judgment below, and this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit in finding the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case, even if there are circumstances such as the defendant's assertion.

As to the unfair argument of sentencing, the sentencing is decided within a reasonable and appropriate scope, taking into account the factors that are conditions for the sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, on the basis of statutory penalty.

However, considering the unique area of sentencing of sentencing of the first instance that is respected under the principle of trial priority and the principle of direct jurisdiction taken by our criminal litigation law and the nature of the ex post facto review of the appellate court, the sentencing of sentencing of the first instance was exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion when comprehensively taking into account the factors and guidelines for sentencing specified in the first instance sentencing trial process.

There are circumstances such as evaluating or maintaining the first-class sentencing determination in full view of the data newly discovered in the course of the appellate court's sentencing hearing.