A. Since the victim of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles is the defendant's quibral with the defendant's hands first, the defendant's act constitutes self-defense.

B. The sentence of the suspended sentence of two years and 40 hours and the order to attend lectures for violence treatment is too unreasonable on the six-month imprisonment sentenced by the court below.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant was faced with head and head on the wall or the floor of the victim while the defendant was too old and boomed in the resistance, and boomed in the breath of the victim's breath.

While the victim and the defendant were punished for trial expenses, the victim had the wheels of the defendant's finger.

Even if the defendant's act goes beyond the limit of passive defense, the defendant's act will go out of active attack.

We cannot accept this part of the defendant's argument.

B. As to the assertion on unfair sentencing, the Defendant inflicted an injury on the victim at the end of the minor trial, and the victim could have been able to do so significantly.

There are many criminal records of the same kind of crime.

Until the trial, it is not visible that efforts were made to recover damage.

In full view of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means, and consequence of the instant crime, as well as various circumstances shown in the records and pleadings, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

We cannot accept this part of the defendant's assertion.

3. The defendant's appeal is without merit and thus dismissed pursuant to Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.