The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the defendant was only a unilateral assault against the victim, and did not inflict any injury as shown in the facts charged, and even if he committed the same act as the facts charged, it is merely a passive defensive act against the victim's unilateral assault, and thus, the illegality of the facts charged in this case is excluded. However, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case is erroneous in

2. The judgment of the court below and the court below based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the defendant and the victim, namely, the photograph taken by the police officer after the wraping of the victim, can be acknowledged that the defendant suffered an injury by taking the victim's face face as well as his/her own face consistently from the investigative agency to the court of the court below (Evidence No. 9, No. 10 of the evidence record). The victim consistently stated that the defendant had consistently made a statement from the investigative agency to the court of the court below that he/she had suffered an injury, and made a statement to the victim before and after the injury, and also stated the victim's injury diagnosis letter as to the above photograph as follows. In full view of the following circumstances, the defendant stated the victim's face as the victim's face as stated in the judgment of the court below.

Furthermore, in light of the aforementioned evidence and the process of the occurrence of the instant case (in particular, the fact that the Defendant appears to have inflicted an assault on the victim), and the content and degree of damage inflicted by the Defendant, etc., the Defendant’s act appears to be an active attack against the victim, not an passive defense against the victim’s attack, and thus, it is reasonable to view it as an act that is acceptable by social norms.