The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case even though the taxi fee excessively and the time limit is low with the victim, and there was no physical contact with the victim, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined at the court below. ① The victim, who is a taxi engineer, stated consistently that the defendant, who was a passenger, was at the time of questioning the victim's body at the time of questioning the victim at the time of the first interrogation of the suspect at the police. ② The defendant denied that there was no assault against the victim at the time of questioning the victim at the time of the first interrogation at the police. However, the second interrogation at the victim and the second interrogation at the victim, “I think that there are many taxi rates, because I think you can am, I can see I am to I am on the left hand, so I am even if I am am. I can not accurately memory I am if I am at the time I am son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's body by reporting the victim's body to the police.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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