The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence presented by the prosecutor based on the gist of the grounds for appeal, it is recognized that the defendant inflicted an injury on the victim, and the defendant's act does not constitute a legitimate defense or a legitimate act, as it did not inflict an injury while fighting with

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the charged facts of this case is erroneous by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion.

2. Summary of the facts charged in this case and the judgment of the court below

A. On December 4, 2014, at around 01:10, the Defendant suffered from an injury, such as d'(38 tax) freshing the body and face of the Defendant’s left eye and the body of the face, from the victim D(38 tax) at the Defendant’s house living room located in Ulsan-gun, Chungcheongnam-do, 103 Dong 305, the summary of the facts charged was freshed by the Defendant, who was in need of approximately 3 weeks of treatment. Accordingly, when the Defendant freshing the victim’s left eye with drinking, the Defendant freshed the victim for about 2 weeks of treatment.

B. The lower court’s judgment: (a) the victim found the Defendant at one time at the time of the new wall, which is a very serious time with the Defendant’s residence, and broken the Defendant, and the reason for the Defendant and the victim’s verbal dispute was due to the Defendant’s her son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son.