A. A. The Defendant did not have any fact when he was the victim, and there was only the fact that the victim exceeded his awareness, and the Defendant was damaged in the course of his attacking and avoiding the attack.

B. The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (one million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, such as the statement at the court below's court below's judgment E as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the defendant's assertion that there was an error of misconception of facts in the judgment below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is without merit.

B. As to the wrongful argument of sentencing, the Defendant’s primary offender is favorable to the Defendant.

However, the crime of this case was committed by assaulting the victim who was living in the same apartment as on the day of the crime, such as the wheels to find the victim, etc., and the nature of the crime is weak, but there was no agreement with the victim or any measure to recover the damage until now.

Considering the above circumstances favorable or unfavorable to the defendant, and the age, sex, environment, and all other conditions of sentencing as shown in the argument of this case, it does not seem that the sentence imposed by the court below against the defendant is too unreasonable.

There is no reason to believe that the above sentencing of the defendant is unfair.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.