The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses of the original judgment and the trial shall be borne by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. This article, which has published a notice of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, is about the height of the defendant raised, not about the victim.

(b) The imposition of a fine of KRW 500,000 in total;

2. Determination

A. In the trial process of the appellate court’s determination of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, there was no new objective reason that could affect the formation of a documentary evidence, and the first instance court’s determination of evidence was clearly erroneous.

Where there is no reasonable ground to deem that the argument leading to the fact-finding is remarkably unfair due to the violation of logical and empirical rules to maintain the judgment as it is, the judgment on the fact-finding of the first instance court shall not be reversed without permission (see Supreme Court Decision 2016Do18031, Mar. 22, 2017). The Defendant asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal in the lower court. The lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion by taking into account the evidence, such as the Defendant, I’s investigative agency, and court’s statement, and investigation report confirming the meaning of the writing posted by the Defendant, and etc., and found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in

Examining the above judgment of the court below in a thorough comparison with the records, the judgment of the court below was clearly erroneous.

There is no reasonable ground to deem that the argument leading to the fact-finding is remarkably unfair due to the violation of logical and empirical rules, and there is no error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is not accepted.

B. In full view of the circumstances determined by the lower court and the conditions of sentencing under Article 51 of the Criminal Act, the lower court’s sentencing is acceptable, and there is no unreasonable ground for the Defendant’s assertion.

3. Thus, the defendant's appeal is without merit and Article 364 of the Criminal Procedure Act is not reasonable.