The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal (in fact-finding) is that the victim E's bodily injury was caused by self-injury by the victim, and since the defendant did not inflict the above injury on the victim, the judgment of the court below is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The Defendant also asserted the same grounds for appeal, but the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case by comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly admitted and examined, and rejected the above assertion in detail under the title “determination of the Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion” in the judgment. Examining the fact-finding and judgment of the lower court in comparison with the records, the lower court’s judgment is just and acceptable.

In addition, the Defendant denies his criminal act from the police to the court of the trial. ① When the Defendant under investigation by the police and the prosecution, the Defendant stated to the effect that “the Defendant was frightened by the victim, leading him to a large number of skins.” However, in the investigation report (CCTV video analysis report), it is impossible to detect the Defendant’s side on the suspect’s side, and ② the Defendant stated that he was “frightening and bruted in color and brut” at the time of the police, but the Defendant made a statement that he was called “self-injury by the victim,” in light of the fact that he was called “self-injury by the victim,” and that he was called “self-injury by the police at the time,” and that he was called “self-injury by the victim,” the lower court’s statement that he was called “self-injury by the Defendant.”