The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal (misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal principles) is as follows: (a) the victim unilaterally expressed his desire to the defendant; and (b) the victim merely saw the victim so that the victim may not escape, and (c) the victim did not inflict any injury on the victim by putting his/her boom belt on several occasions.

Even if not,

Even if the defendant's act is to protect himself from the unilateral illegal attack of the victim, the illegality is excluded because the defendant's act constitutes a legitimate act that does not violate social rules and is to prevent the victim's escape.

2. The judgment of the court below is based on the evidence duly adopted and examined, i.e., ① the victim stated at the investigative agency that “the defendant was scambling his seat belt without water, and received treatment at the hospital by scambing it,” ② the defendant also stated at the investigative agency that “the victim was scambling and scambling the victim’s seat belt.” ③ The victim’s diagnosis in “the cause and presumption of injury” column “the victim’s injury was scambling another person’s seat belt.” The victim’s name in “the disease name” column was stated as “the scambling, tension, scambine, scam, and scambine of the father’s scamth, which was damaged by the scambling of the victim,” and ④ the scamblinger E merely scambling the victim’s s scam and made a statement to the effect that the victim was s scam.

It is difficult to see the fact that the victim inflicted an injury on the victim, and the background of the crime, the form of the act, and the degree of the exercise of force.