A. Defendant 1) Some assaults against the victim F (2012 highest 400) on the part of the Defendant (2012 highest 400) committed an assault against the victim’s head, however, there is no fact that the Defendant committed an assault against the victim’s right-hand bucks, the victim’s right-hand bucks, and the part of the victim’s ship and right-hand

B) The part concerning assault and obstruction of business against the victim H (2012 highest 400) was only a verbal dispute with the victim, and the defendant did not interfere with his/her business by prohibiting them from entering the sports center by assaulting the victim or entering the victim. C) The part concerning bodily harm and obstruction of performance of official duties against the victim M (2012 highest 402) in a circumstance where the defendant is disputing with L, the victim M was covered by the defendant, and the victim was not allowed to have his/her haird against the victim.

2) Legal principles A) The part concerning injury to the victim M and obstruction of the performance of official duties (2012 highest 402) was defrisoned by the Defendant, but this constitutes legitimate self-defense as it was an act in a situation where the Defendant’s neck cannot be hidden even after the Defendant’s suppression.

B) The part concerning the illegal use of a motor vehicle against the victim C (2012 Highest 546) was that the victim C interfered with the progress of another vehicle by building a cargo vehicle on the road, thereby moving the said cargo vehicle for public interest, such as passage of another vehicle. Thus, it does not constitute an element of the crime of unlawful use of a motor vehicle, or constitutes a justifiable act stipulated under Article 20 of the Criminal Act. (C) The part concerning intimidation to carry a deadly weapon against the victim P (2012 Highest 598) was that the victim could not have caused fear of her appearance due to the Defendant’s act

3) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two years and six months of imprisonment, confiscation, and so on are too unreasonable).

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

(a) mistake of facts by the defendant;