The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of the facts or legal principles) stated that “the Defendant has led the victim D on the day of the instant case to the ground level at a height of 1m high,” and the Defendant’s spouse F made a statement to the effect that “the Defendant was under the control of the Defendant by keeping the victim from the horse with his arms (a person who suffered damage).” In full view of the above Defendant and F’s statement and written diagnosis of the injury, the Defendant’s statement and written diagnosis of the injury can be sufficiently recognized.

In addition, considering the fact that the degree of the victim's injury is much more serious than the degree of the victim's injury, it is difficult to view the defendant's act as a passive resistance to defend against the victim's unfair attack, which is a legitimate defense.

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

2. In light of the records, a thorough examination of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below in light of the records, the court below's finding that the facts charged in this case are not a crime or a case where there is no proof of a crime is just and acceptable (in particular, according to the photograph taken immediately after the case, the defendant was exposed to the wooden monet price per head, which is a dangerous object, and had a significant blood transfusion on the head part of the head, the victim seems to have a minor degree of injury because he/she was merely a blood transfusion on his/her nose and pedago (the 11th page and the 12th page of the investigation record), and the spouse E of the victim's spouse E in the court of the court of the court below.

The statement was made to "I am only I am (85 pages of the trial record)."