A. Regarding the facts charged of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendant inflicted an injury on the victim by setting up against the victim’s assault, and the Defendant’s act constitutes self-defense or legitimate act.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (fine 5 million won) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

A. In light of the background, process, method, degree, etc. of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, Defendant’s act constitutes an attack against the victim, and cannot be deemed as a justifiable act that does not go against the current self-defense or social norms to protect the infringement of one’s legal interests.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

B. The Criminal Procedure Act, which adopts the principle of trial-oriented and directness of unreasonable sentencing, should respect the determination of sentencing in cases where there exists no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). There is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the original judgment as the new sentencing materials have not been submitted at the trial court. In full view of all the reasons for sentencing indicated in the record of the instant case, the lower court’s sentencing is too remote, and thus, cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

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

In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act because it is groundless.