The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, misunderstanding the fact, was extending out to the victim to defend the victim’s violence at the time of the instant case, and the Defendant’s grandchildren in the process contacted the victim’s face.

The acts of defendants constitute legitimate defense or legitimate acts.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (2 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court as to the assertion of mistake of facts, it is difficult to view that the Defendant’s act is a legitimate defense or legitimate act, since it is difficult to view that the Defendant extending to the victim’s face to protect the victim’s violence.

This part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

1) At the time of the instant case, the victim dumpeded and dumpdddddddddddddddddddddddddddd

The victim and E, the president of the C cafeteria(hereinafter “instant cafeteria”) as indicated in the judgment of the court below, were fighting in the following part of the instant cafeteria, and the victim’s day-on F, the victim’s day-on, asked the Defendant and I to fight.

2) When Defendant 1, I, and F went back to the restaurant of this case, E was under the control of the victim by selling.

E said that the victim was the victim first fighting with the defendant et al., the defendant left the chest of the victim, and the defendant who caused the victim by leaving the victim was in excess of the victim's face once due to drinking.

3) immediately after the instant case, the victim was in the condition of tear and festing.

If the defendant moves out to avoid violence of the victim, it was difficult for the victim to cause the above injury to the victim if the loss is in contact with the face of the victim.

F even if the F is the first day of the victim, F.