2. On January 26, 2016, around 01:30 on January 26, 2016, the summary of the facts charged: (a) the Defendant took the face of A who assaults the Defendant’s woman-friendly appearance G at the front of Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “Seoul”), and took the body of A in his/her hand.

As a result, the Defendant inflicted injury on A, such as the mouth of the Haak A, which requires approximately six weeks of medical treatment.

3. The lower court rendered a judgment on the grounds that the Defendant’s statement at A’s police and the lower court’s criminal administration, which seems consistent with the facts that the Defendant had taken the face of A, is difficult to believe, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, and that the Defendant’s act of harming A’s body in his/her hand, as an act to protect G from an unlawful attack against A who assaults the Defendant’s female-child recruitment G, is an act to protect the Defendant’s sexual intercourse, and thus, the illegality of the society’s norms

4. A’s statement in the police and this court, A’s photograph, and a written diagnosis attached to A’s statement, A’s statement in the court of original judgment, J’s statement in the police, and investigation report (on-site) as evidence showing that the Defendant had taken the face of A, but the police and this court’s statement in A’s police and this court can be acknowledged as follows: A’s statement in the court of original judgment; A’s statement in the police and this court; i.e., A stated that the police officer was not subject to an assault at all immediately after the instant case; and the J reported as witness of the instant case, at the time of the instant case, that the Defendant and A did not seem to have taken the fright or at the time of the instant investigation.

In light of the stated facts, it is difficult to believe that A’s report was made, and A’s report on attachment of A’s photograph and written complaint was that at the time of the instant case, A suffered bodily injury, such as humke, humke, etc., but at the court of original instance, A was in the state of drinking alcohol at the time of the instant case.