A. Before the misunderstanding of the legal principles, the Defendant used violence, such as d first shacking the Defendant’s shoulder, fluoring the Defendant’s shoulder on the ground floor, fluoring off, walking the brush, etc., and the Defendant, after exercising the violence, she was forced to commit an act, such as booming the cream with the aim of suppressing D.

The defendant's act should be evaluated as a legitimate defense.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The materials supporting the Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant used violence against D prior to the exercise of violence against D before the Defendant’s exercise of force against D, and the escape of D was an act to suppress the Defendant. Rather, there is only a circumstance where the Defendant used violence, such as the victim’s bucking around the on-site police officer.

The defendant's legitimate defense is not accepted.

B. There is no significant change in circumstances to consider the sentencing of the defendant after the judgment of the court below regarding the unfair argument of sentencing.

In light of the facts alleged by the Defendant on the grounds of appeal, the lower court’s sentence cannot be deemed unfair, even if all of the circumstances alleged by the Defendant are considered as grounds of appeal.

The defendant's argument of sentencing is not accepted.

3. According to the conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.