폭행
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the defendant made a resistance to spabnize the victim's bat and spread the bat, and thus, this constitutes a legitimate defense or passive resistance. However, the court below convicted the defendant. The judgment of the court below 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 in the court below: ① The victim, who was asked by the defendant, consistently from the investigative agency to the court of the court of the court below, wanting to take a cab into the meaning of paragraph; the defendant was able to live in a flab and 112 report the flab; and the defendant was able to escape from the time of the report, and the defendant had taken a flab picture from the time of the report.
The statement is that the victim stated, ② the time when the victim reported 112 was 19:26:29; the time when the defendant took a video coincides with the victim’s statement 19:27:39; ③ the victim made a report 112; the victim made a report 112; and the victim made a report 112 more time until the police officer made the report, and reconfisced the police officer’s dispatch; ④ the victim made a video photograph, ④ the victim’s photographing the video, and the victim’s “Nea knb was taken,” and the victim tried to flee “in the previous report processing details; ⑤ the victim did not assault the Defendant to take a fat, etc. before taking a video,” and the victim did not appear to have taken a fatch to the extent that he did not escape.