The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In other words, the Defendant did not remove the victim's hand (abundation) by asking the victim's hand (abundation). In the case of a fighting match where the victim was punished by an assault from the victims first, the victim left the victim's hand back to the victim's hand in order to defend the victim's hand in the Defendant's hand, and only the situation was caused by the victim.

Therefore, the defendant's act constitutes a legitimate act of self-defense or excessive defense.

In addition, the victim's fingers at the time of the case did not cut the body of the victim.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In a case where it is reasonable to view that the perpetrator’s act of judgment on the assertion of mistake of fact or misapprehension of legal principles was at the first place of attack with the intent of attack, rather than to defend the victim’s unfair attack, and thus, the perpetrator was forced to attack and set up against it, the harmful act has the nature of the act of attack at the same time as the act of attack. Therefore, it cannot be viewed

(See Supreme Court Decision 2003Do4934 Decided June 25, 2004, etc.). In addition, since the attack act and defense act are continuously intersectiond and act of defense is at the same time, it is common that it is difficult to view either party's act as a legitimate act for defense or self-defense, or as a legitimate act for defense, even if it appears that one party's act was committed by appearance, in case where one party unilaterally commits an unlawful attack and the other party uses the tangible power as a means of resistance to protect himself from such unlawful attack and to escape it, such act does not go beyond the limit of passive defense.