Even if the defendant's act constitutes a legitimate defense or legitimate act, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. In the lower court’s determination as to the assertion of mistake of fact, the Defendant asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal, and the lower court rejected the above assertion in detail, stating in detail the summary of the evidence “as above,” and comparing the judgment of the lower court with the records, the lower court is justified and acceptable, and there was no error by misapprehending the facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of facts is without merit.

B. The act of attack and defense was committed by a person who conducted a fighting match in compliance with the judgment of the misunderstanding of the legal doctrine, and the act of attack and defense was also in the nature of both the act of attack and defense at the same time. Thus, the act of a party is a legitimate act to defend against a person who committed an act of either party only.

The defendant's act does not constitute a legitimate defense (see Supreme Court Decision 201Do13927, Dec. 8, 2011). As seen earlier, it is recognized that the defendant inflicted an injury on the victim as stated in the facts constituting an offense in the judgment below, and it is reasonable to deem that the defendant's act exceeds the limit of passive defense against the victim's unfair attack. Thus, it does not constitute a legitimate defense or legitimate act.

Therefore, there is no reason for misunderstanding of the legal principles of the defendant.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit.