The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor (misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles) of the grounds for appeal, the defendant first attacked A and suffered an attack against A, and the defendant coming out of A's chests toward A and going out with A, was an active attack rather than to prevent A's access. If the defendant was a defensive purpose, it is sufficient that the defendant would get out of the floor under the influence of A's steel.

The lower court determined otherwise by misapprehending the legal doctrine, even though the Defendant’s act does not constitute a legitimate defense.

2. On the grounds of appeal by the public prosecutor, the court below acknowledged the following facts: (a) while the defendant was at the time and was at the time, when the defendant was at several times, the defendant was at the end of the two parts of the back wheeled vehicle, and the defendant was at the end of the two parts of the two parts of the back wheeled vehicle and avoided A's assault; and (b) the defendant continued to be at the end of the safe string with the defendant; (c) the defendant was at the time when the part of the chest was sent to the defendant during the process of avoiding the assault by the defendant; (d) the defendant was at the time when the defendant was at the time when the defendant was at the end of the vehicle of ready-mixed with A; and (e) the defendant was at the time when the defendant was at the seat of the defendant when he was at the time, it appears that the defendant was unable to deviate from the extent of attack by A without suppressing the defendant; and (e) the defendant's act of attacking and defending the legal interests of A, compared with the above facts of attack or defense against the defendant.

(ii)..