The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the fact that a political party defense victim takes the face of the defendant from beer's disease before the defendant's face, it constitutes legitimate defense for the defendant to inflict bodily injury on the victim.

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

2. Determination

(a) An ordinary attack and a defense act is conducted between persons who conduct a fighting match in compliance with the determination of a political party’s defense assertion, and the act of defense simultaneously takes the character of both attack and defense, which are the act of attack, and thus, barring special circumstances, the act of either party is a legitimate act for the purpose of defending against fishing, which is only the act of either party.

(1) The Defendant and the Defendant were in dispute with the victim at the toilet in the singing practice room as stated in the lower judgment, and thereafter there was the victim, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court.

5 It is recognized that fighting fightings such as the victim's scambling of the defendant with beerer's disease and drinking, and the defendant's scambling of the victim in the process of re-scaming the defendant's scambling, and therefore, the defendant's act constitutes an attack at the same time as an attack.

subsection (b) of this section.

The above assertion by the defendant is without merit.

B. It is recognized that the victim of the judgment on the unfair argument of sentencing was unable to punish the defendant at the court below.

However, considering the nature of the crime of this case, the age, sex, family environment of the defendant, the background and result of the crime of this case, and the following circumstances, etc., the court below's punishment is too unreasonable since it is too unreasonable. Thus, the above assertion by the defendant is without merit.

3. Accordingly, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the instant appeal is groundless.