The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant misunderstanding the fact was booming the victim, it does not go on the part of the victim.

The defendant saw the victim's francation in the continued francation of the victim's francing.

The victim saw that the victim was the defendant, and the defendant was a drink of the victim, and the victim was a few times of the victim's math, and only one of the victims was the victim's son.

B. Examining the aforementioned series of processes by misapprehending the legal doctrine, the Defendant’s act constitutes a defense act responding to the violence of the victim, which constitutes a legitimate defense.

(c)

The punishment of the court below (4 months of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the victim’s statement is consistent and consistent, and the statement of F, a third party, also complies with the contents of the victim’s statement (the victim consistently stated in the repeated investigation process that “the defendant was sealed by the defendant, and the face of the victim exceeded the defendant continued to be taken by the defendant),” and was in the same place at the time of the instant case.

F also stated that “The sound of singing is followed by the victim, and the victim was standing on the floor,” and that there was a defendant listed on the floor. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, including the victim’s statement, the fact that the Defendant took the face of another victim who was on board the ship of the victim by destroying the victim beyond the victim, can be sufficiently recognized.

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

B. As to the assertion of misunderstanding legal principles, the Defendant’s act of assaulting the victim as stated in the facts charged is deemed not to defend the victim’s unfair attack but to have the intent to attack the victim. Thus, the Defendant’s act constitutes a legitimate defense or an act of social reasonableness, and thus, constitutes a justifiable act.