A. The misunderstanding of the legal principle is that the victim was aware of the defendant's face first and the defendant was satisfyed against the victim's face, and this act constitutes legitimate self-defense or legitimate act, as an act to defend the victim's improper attack.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of KRW 300,000) is too unreasonable.

2. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below on the assertion of misapprehension of legal principles, the defendant's act is deemed as an act of attack or attack against the victim beyond passive resistance to escape from the victim's assault, and it cannot be deemed as an act of attack or attack against the victim's will of self-defense or legitimate damage, and thus, the defendant's assertion of misapprehension of legal principles is rejected. In light of the circumstances leading up to the above crime, situation at the time of the crime, and the form and degree of assault committed by the victim and the defendant, etc., it is reasonable to view that the defendant's act was committed as an act of attack or attack against the victim beyond the victim's passive resistance to escape from the victim's assault.

3. There is no new special circumstance or change of circumstances that can be reflected in sentencing after the decision of the court below on the assertion of unfair sentencing is rendered.

In addition, in full view of various circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, relationship with the victim, motive means and consequence of the crime, etc., and the sentencing conditions appearing in the records and pleadings, the lower court’s sentencing does not seem to be too heavy beyond the scope of reasonable discretion, and thus, the Defendant’s allegation of unfair sentencing cannot be accepted.

4. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is without merit.