A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and the Defendant did not have any contact with the victim’s body, and the Defendant’s act of taking the victim’s cell phone by hand constitutes self-defense or legitimate act to defend the infringement of his or his or her family’s portrait rights, but there is an error of misapprehension of facts and misapprehension of legal principles that found the Defendant guilty of the crime of assault against the Defendant. 2) Punishment of an unreasonable sentencing judgment (fine 500,00)

B. According to the evidence of mistake of facts, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the victim of the bodily injury on the part of the bodily injury is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts. 2) The sentence imposed by the court below of unfair sentencing is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. 1) Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below regarding the Defendant’s appeal, the fact that the Defendant committed an assault against the victim as stated in the judgment below is sufficiently recognized. In full view of the facts acknowledged by the above evidence, such as the Defendant’s act of the Defendant’s act was a considerable reason for defending the current illegal infringement of his or others’ legal interests, or an act that does not violate social rules, and there is no particular change in circumstances to consider the sentencing after the lower court’s assertion of unfair sentencing. Considering the circumstances asserted by the Defendant as the grounds for appeal, even if considering the circumstances asserted by the Defendant as the grounds for appeal, the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable.

(b)the appeal of the prosecutor;