The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Compared to the Defendant’s intention, misunderstanding of facts 1) as plastic goods and plastics, which the Defendant used as his hand, had been faced with with C’s head, and thus, did not have any awareness of causing injury to C, and the wound wife suffered by C cannot be deemed as an injury under social norms as minor. Therefore, the lower court convicted the Defendant of the facts charged in the crime of false accusation in this case on the premise that the Defendant is recognized as the crime of injury, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. In addition, the lower court erred by misapprehending the fact that the Defendant was guilty of the facts charged in the crime of false accusation in this case on the premise that it was recognized as the crime of injury to C. 2) as the Defendant filed a complaint with C

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (2 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) As to the assertion of mistake of fact that there was no intention of injury to C, the court below duly adopted and investigated the following circumstances, namely, ① the defendant made a statement from the investigative agency to the court that he was at the time of the head of C from the physical disease; ② the contents of the statement are consistent and specific; ② C recorded a conversation between himself and the defendant with a cell phone after the physical disease; according to the recording in the record, the defendant used the horses at the time, and made a conflict with C, and the defendant sent the statement from C to “FFIIIIIII would like to hear the phrase “FIIIIIIIIIIII would am.” (On the 35th of the evidence record, in light of the context before and after the recording of the above record, it is reasonable to interpret that C was at least a fact finding that there was such fact, and ③ C has been at least 14 days of treatment as follows.