The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal (a factual error) was that the Defendant did not merely assault the victim by the intention of defense, but assaulted the victim by the intent of attack. As such, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts relating to the establishment of self-defense.

2. In full view of the circumstances acknowledged by the pleadings and records, such as the difference between the Defendant and the victim’s objective physical conditions, witness E’s testimony at the original trial, and consistency between the victim’s statement and other evidence, the Defendant, as appropriately determined by the lower court, committed an act identical to the facts charged as a passive resistance to escape from the current infringement on his/her body, and this constitutes legitimate self-defense or legitimate act.

This part of the Prosecutor's argument is not accepted.

3. Conclusion, pursuant to Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.