The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The accused of the grounds for appeal does not have assault the victim;

Even if there was some physical contact between the defendant and the victim, it should be viewed as a legitimate act that passively resists the victim's assault.

2. Determination

A. Based on the evidence duly admitted and examined, the lower court recognized the following facts: (a) based on the Defendant’s act of assaulting the victim; (b) the victim’s head was frightened; and (c) the victim’s head was frightened on the part of the victim; and (d) the victim was frightened.

In light of the records, we affirm the finding and judgment of the court below as just, and there is no error of law by mistake of facts as alleged by the defendant in the judgment below.

Defendant’s assertion is not accepted.

B. Whether a criminal defendant's act constitutes a justifiable act that does not contravene social norms should be determined on an individual basis, based on specific circumstances. To recognize such a justifiable act, the following requirements should be met: (i) legitimacy of the motive or purpose of the act; (ii) reasonableness of the means or method; (iii) balance between the protected interests and the infringed interests; (iv) urgency; and (v) supplementary nature that there is no other means or method than the act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do8074, Apr. 27, 2006). The degree of the tangible force used by the criminal defendant; (ii) degree of witness G continues to sell the victim's arms to prevent a female victim from spreading the criminal defendant; and (iii) further, the injured person stated that he did not assault the criminal defendant.