The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant recognized all the facts constituting an offense in the lower court, but in fact there was no fact that the victim was suffering from beer, and beer’s disease does not constitute a dangerous article.

B. The sentence of imprisonment (eight months of imprisonment) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Although the Defendant made a confession of criminal facts at the time of original adjudication in the original trial in the original trial court, he/she denies it by re-afusing it in the original trial.

Therefore, in determining the credibility of a confession made by the defendant in the original court, it is necessary to determine whether there is a situation to have a reasonable doubt in the motive or process of the confession, or in light of the following: (a) whether the contents of the statement of the confession themselves are objectively rational in determining the credibility of the confession in the original court; (b) what the motive or reason of the confession is; and (c) what is the motive or reason of the confession; and (d) whether there is any conflict or inconsistency with the confession among circumstantial evidence other than the confession.

(See Supreme Court Decisions 98Do159 delivered on March 13, 1998, 99Do214 delivered on December 8, 200, etc.). However, according to the records, the content of confession itself is not objectively rational.

There is no evidence to find any conflict or inconsistency with other circumstantial evidence than a confession. In addition, there is no evidence to find that there is no voluntariness of confession due to the reason prescribed in Article 309 of the Criminal Procedure Act, or that there is no evidence to find that there was a situation where there was a situation to have the motive or process of confession.

Therefore, it is reasonable to view that the confession of the defendant is reliable as it conforms to the truth.

Furthermore, the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below as to whether there was evidence for the confession of the defendant.