A. In fact, the Defendant had a misunderstanding of facts against the victim’s face 4 to 5 times, and there was no fact that the victim’s high return was shaking.

B. In light of the legal principles, when the victim first gets injured by the defendant, and the defendant was deprived of his/her fingers, damage was inflicted on the victim's fingers, and the defendant's act constitutes self-defense or legitimate act.

C. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (fine 3,00,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below on the assertion of mistake of facts are consistent from the investigative agency to the court of the court below, namely, the victim suffered injuries, such as "the defendant was frightened by her face while she was frightened by her face, and caused her failure to take her face," and the defendant stated in the police to the effect that "the defendant stated to the effect that "the victim was frighted by her face at the time of the instant case, but the victim did not regard her face at the time of the instant case, but she said that she was frighted by her face," and the defendant's wife Matdo police at the time of the instant case stated to the effect that "the victim was frighted by her face," the victim visited the police station immediately after the instant case, reported the damage that she was frightd by her assault and drinking, and the victim visited the victim on 10th day after the date of the instant accident.

‘The purpose of ‘D' is to appeal symptoms, and D' medical doctors are to provide the defendant with an injury diagnosis report at the dental college hospital.