The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant did not assault the victim by booming his breath, and rather, the victim faced his own timber with the vehicle hand.

2. The judgment is based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, i.e., the following circumstances: ① the victim demanded a return of a merat paper stating the contract and telephone number written on a passenger car, but the defendant did not offer it; at the time, the defendant was satisfed. At the time, the defendant was satisfing the victim's breath. There seems to be no special circumstances that the victim made a false statement in order for the defendant to be subject to criminal punishment; ② the defendant did not look into the breath of the victim's breath in the course of taking advantage of the victim's breath, etc., and instead, the defendant did not go against the victim's breath in the course of taking advantage of the victim's breath, etc., on the other hand, he was aware of the fact that the victim was batfing with the victim's bat at the time of taking advantage of the witness's blaf.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion.