The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

In the absence of the fact that the Defendant merely flatd the victim’s flat with flat, and did not follow the flat, and that the victim inflicted the salt flat of the drilling requiring medical treatment for 14 days, the judgment below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous and contrary to the rules of evidence

The misapprehension of the legal principle as to the crime of injury by misunderstanding the legal principle refers to damaging the completeness of the body or causing disturbance of physiological functions. Annoying person, which is extremely unnecessary to treat as an upper state, is not a crime of injury in the event that it is difficult to deem that such treatment was in violation of the health condition. The victim’s diagnosis is claiming for the cryp and the cryp, and there is no special opinion on X-R-ray. However, this is merely a clinical presumption, and it is merely a clinical presumption, and it is difficult to regard the defendant as an injury because the "eromatic and culp salt" is a symptoms that may frequently occur in daily life and thus, it is possible to cure nature without receiving any special treatment. Therefore, even if it is difficult to deem the defendant guilty, the court below erred in the misapprehension

The court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles in finding the defendant guilty, even though the defendant made self-defense to escape from the illegal attack of the victim.

The punishment (one million won of fine) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

Judgment

The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, etc., i.e., ① the victim has consistently made a statement from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court to the effect that “the Defendant and the Defendant were satisfing and satisfing, and the Defendant was satisfing his satisfing and satisfing,” and ② the victim has consistently made a statement to the effect that “