A. The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine by recognizing the guilty of the Defendant, even though the victim A, a co-defendant of the first instance trial, committed an act of assaulting the Defendant first and as a legitimate defense against it.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (an amount of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, according to CCTV images reproduced at the trial of the party, the victim first committed an assault against the defendant, but the defendant also actively committed an attack for a considerable period of time, such as an attacking the victim's head debt. This is inevitable to view it as an act of injury beyond a mere defensive act.

In the same purport, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is just and there is no error in law, and this part of the defendant'

B. Sentencing is minor and minor in light of the circumstances that may be considered in light of the developments leading up to the instant injury, but the lower court already selects the Defendant as a person who is a co-defendant of the first instance trial, different from the Defendant’s choice of imprisonment, taking into account such circumstances, and taking into account the equity with the same and similar cases, it does not seem that the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

Therefore, we cannot accept this part of the defendant's assertion.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.