The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant does not have any misunderstanding of facts as stated in the facts charged, nor did he assault the victim.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that convicted the facts charged of this case is erroneous in mistake of facts.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (two million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the records of the instant case, a thorough examination of the evidence duly examined and adopted by the court below, such as the case of a determination of misunderstanding of facts, the police statement of the victim E, the statement of the statement of the police officer, the F, D, etc., and the statement, the suspect and the victim's body photograph, etc., is sufficiently recognized.

Therefore, the court below's finding the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is just, and there is no error of law of misunderstanding the facts.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

B. It is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the first instance court when there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court’s judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing, and where the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect them. Although the first instance court’s sentencing falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is desirable to reverse the first instance court’s judgment on the sole ground that the difference between the appellate court’s opinion and

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In light of the following: (a) there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the original judgment as the materials for new sentencing have not been submitted in the trial; and (b) comprehensively considering the reasons for sentencing revealed in the records and pleadings of the instant case, the lower court’s sentencing is too so excessive that it exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.