A. The Defendant (the mistake or misunderstanding of legal principle) did not inflict an injury on the victim by putting a breath of the victim’s breath and sculing.

The injured party's wife is caused by the victim's knife.

B. The prosecutor (e.g., imprisonment for four months) of the lower court is too unfilled and unfair.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s judgment as to the Defendant’s assertion and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by this court, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

1) The victim consistently made a statement from the investigative agency to the court of the court below to the purport that “the defendant walked immediately after the completion of the bank cleaning and walked with the defendant, and the defendant was faced with the head’s wall in the process of 3 to 4 times in which the head was salved with the defendant and the victim at the time of the instant case.” The G, H, and H, who appeared to have been committing the crime at the investigative agency, and the E, and F, are in accord with the victim’s statement from the investigative agency to the court of the court of the court below, stating to the effect that “the head of the victim was faced with the victim’s wall inside the windowpan, and the victim’s head was faced with the victim’s body.”

3 The defendant asserts to the effect that witnesses who did not use a custody money for witnesses any more than one person will make a statement unfavorable to himself in collusion with the victim.

However, the defendant stated in the investigative agency that he would know why he is false or not, and the above argument related to the custody amount is difficult to believe that it was first made in this court.

In addition, E and F are some of the defendants and victims in the original judgment.