2. The following circumstances that can be acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, namely, ① the victim, from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court, on November 3, 2014, at the apartment site where the Defendant was living, at around 16:00 on November 3, 2014, did the Defendant’s act, such as cutting down his shoulder and cutting down his arms in order to care for the children from whom the Defendant was aware of.

In full view of the following facts: “E, the mother of the victim who observed the instant case, has made a statement corresponding thereto in the court of original instance (whether the victim was in excess of the defendant’s act, is inconsistent; however, the victim’s bodily injury part is a complete part, and the above circumstance alone does not reject the credibility of the whole statement); ② on November 4, 2014 following the day of the instant case, Byung’s name at the hospital on November 4, 2014, the victim was issued a written diagnosis of injury as stated in the facts charged by the husband (the patient’s statement) and the expected treatment period was “14 days from the day of water surface”; ③ the Defendant also acted as stated in the facts charged, and recognized the fact that the victim’s arms were in excess of the victim’s arms during the instant dispute.”

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

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. It is so decided as per Disposition.