The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles 1) The defect that the victim tried to forcibly attract the defendant to the office of the victim, and the defendant resisted against the victim at the time when the victim was boomed with his hand. The defendant did not have an intention of injury. 2) The defendant merely spawn the victim passively in the course of resisting the victim. Thus, the defendant's act constitutes a legitimate act and thus, it is justified.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (700,000 won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., (i) the victim consistently stated in the investigative agency and the court of the court of the court below that “the defendant did not pay money to the defendant, but did not pay money thereafter, and the defendant did not go to the defendant's left hand in the office and did so.” (ii) At the court of the court of the court below, E statements that “the victim and the defendant did not come to dispute at the entrance of an officetel as a matter of concern about the victim and the defendant's office, and the defendant got to leave the victim's office, and the defendant did so.” In light of the following circumstances, it is recognized that the defendant had inflicted an injury on the victim's left part of the body of the victim, and that there was an intention to inflict an injury on the defendant in light of the defendant's act of attacking the victim actively.”

Therefore, it cannot be viewed as a justifiable act that does not violate social rules.

3) Therefore, the Defendant’s above assertion is without merit. B. Regarding the assertion of unfair sentencing, the Defendant denies the instant crime.