All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant was guilty of the Defendant’s mistake of the fact that the Defendant only committed an act to display the victim’s hacks so that the victim might not get out of it, and in the process, the victim’s left hand hacks the enormous hacks. However, the lower court held that the Defendant was unable to hack the victim’s body.

The wrong determination was made.

The defendant's act of misunderstanding legal principles is a legitimate defense or excessive defense.

The punishment sentenced by the court below (one million won) which is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

The punishment sentenced by the court below by the public prosecutor is too uneasible and unfair.

Judgment

Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below by the defendant, the defendant can be found to have taken the body of the victim into consideration at the time of the instant case. Therefore, the defendant's assertion on this cannot be accepted.

Although the Defendant alleged that the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine of the Defendant, the lower court rejected the said assertion on the grounds that detailed reasons were stated in its judgment under the title “determination of the defense counsel’s assertion”.

In full view of all the circumstances presented by the lower court, which are duly admitted and investigated by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, the said judgment by the lower court is just and acceptable, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal doctrine.

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

Defendant

In addition, the crime of this case committed by the prosecutor's unfair assertion of sentencing was committed by the defendant with enormous growth and the nature of the crime is not less severe, while the victim is exempted from causing the assault of this case, the degree of damage of the victim is minor, and the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant, etc., which are shown in the records of this case and the theory of changes in the judgment of the court below.