The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (fact-finding) was that the Defendant was able to put both arms of the victim and assault the victim in order to defend the victim by intending to pricing the Defendant on the ground of the wall.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, i.e., ① the victim set up a guard against the defendant as a matter of land boundary at the investigative agency and the court below's court court's ruling: (a) the victim: (i) the defendant extracted posts on the ground that "the defendant would not open to the ground; (b) he did so; (c) he did so; and (d) the defendant did so; (d) he did so with his bat; and (e) the defendant did so with his bat; (d) the defendant did so with his batch; and (e) the defendant did so with his batf; and (e) the victim suffered injury because of bather own force; and (e) the victim's physical strength and attitude of the statement; and (b) the injury part of the victim's diagnosis report conforms to the victim's statements. In light of the above circumstances, it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant abused the victim and sustained the victim.

B. On the other hand, the defendant's above act constitutes an act of attacking a victim more actively than to escape from the victim's attack.

Therefore, it cannot be said that it constitutes a legitimate act that does not violate self-defense or social norms against illegal infringement by the other party.

C. Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.