The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The judgment below

Examining the evidence duly adopted by the first instance court, the lower court’s determination that the facts charged in this case were guilty on the grounds stated in its reasoning is justifiable, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules or by exceeding the bounds of

In addition, according to the records, the defendant asserted the misapprehension of legal principles as to the facts charged in this case in the statement of grounds for appeal, and the court below rejected the defendant's appeal on the ground that the defendant's grounds for appeal were erroneous facts and the grounds for appeal did not clearly withdraw the misapprehension of legal principles on the date of the first trial of the court below. The court below rejected the defendant's appeal without determining the misapprehension of legal principles

However, examining the circumstances revealed in the records, such as the means and degree of harm inflicted on the defendant, the means and method of the defendant's act compared thereto, and the result of the act, etc., it cannot be deemed that the act of the defendant in this case constitutes a case where there is considerable reason to defend the defendant's current infringement or to prevent such infringement. In addition, it is difficult to view that the defendant's act of defense in this case constitutes a case where the defense act exceeded its degree or where the act of defense in this case constitutes a case where there is fear, light, entertainment, or confusion under the night or other extraordinary circumstances, and therefore, it cannot be deemed that the judgment of the court below did not recognize self-defense. Thus, the omission of the judgment of the court below did not constitute an unlawful act

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed.