The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles unilaterally committed an assault against the victim, while misunderstanding of the facts, the victim was spawned in the process, but did not assault the victim. The defendant did not have the intent of assault, and the defendant's act constitutes a legitimate defense or legitimate act to escape from the victim's assault. Although the defendant committed an act to block the victim's office entrance, the defendant did not have any act such as leaving the house door on the floor, and the defendant's opening of the entrance was for talking about the settlement of the relationship with the victim and constitutes a justifiable act. However, the court below found the defendant guilty of all of the facts charged of this case. The court below erred by misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles.

B. The sentencing of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of all the charges of this case on the grounds that the Defendant’s act does not constitute a legitimate defense or a legitimate act, on the following grounds: (a) the victim’s act constitutes a separate attack against the victim, not a minimum defense act, but a separate attack against the victim who wishes to enter the office; (b) the Defendant’s act cannot be deemed as a legitimate defense or a legitimate act. In so doing, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of all of the charges of this case on the grounds that the Defendant’s act cannot be deemed as a legitimate defense or a legitimate act.

2) Examining the records in light of the records of the above deliberation, we affirm and accept the above fact finding and determination by the court below, and ① the victim.