The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of the instant case, the Defendant: (a) in order to remove the victim’s face in the process of a verbal dispute with the victim; (b) however, there was no assault on the victim.

B. The misapprehension of the legal principle is aimed at avoiding the threat of the victim’s face, and it is not unlawful as it constitutes legitimate self-defense or legitimate act.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, i.e., (i) the victim specifically and consistently stated the facts and developments of the assaulted by the Defendant in the investigative agency and the court of the lower court, and (ii) the fact that the Defendant and the victim have a negative dispute and vagabonds between the Defendant and the victim, the fact that the Defendant used the victim’s face twice as stated in the judgment of the lower court can be fully recognized.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

B. In full view of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below regarding the assertion of legal principles, the defendant can be recognized as having committed an assault against the victim's face with the victim's hand floor during the vision. As long as the defendant committed an act as stated in the judgment of the court below with intent to attack the victim, the defendant's act cannot be deemed as an act to defend the victim's unfair infringement, and it is difficult to view it within the scope of passive resistance, and therefore, it does not constitute legitimate self-defense or legitimate act.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of legal principles is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.