The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of the legal principles (1) The Defendant did not assault the victims as stated in the facts constituting an offense in the judgment below, and rather did not unilaterally respond to the victims.

(2) Although the Defendant was never prevented to defend the victims’ assault, it constitutes a legitimate act or a legitimate defense.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court against the Defendant (2 million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the defendant can sufficiently recognize the fact that the defendant committed an assault to the victims as stated in the facts constituting a crime in the judgment below, and such an act does not constitute a legitimate act or a legitimate defense.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below did not err in the misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as alleged by the defendant, and the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. In full view of the following circumstances: (a) there is no special circumstance or circumstance that may be newly considered in sentencing after the pronouncement of the lower judgment regarding an unfair assertion of sentencing; (b) the Defendant had the history of being punished for the same kind of crime; and (c) other circumstances that form the conditions for the argument and the sentencing specified in the record of the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, sex, criminal conduct, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and method of the crime; and (d) the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed

3. In conclusion, the Defendant’s appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the court below (Provided, That the judgment of the court below is clearly erroneous and erroneous in the judgment of the court below as to “the penalty amount of KRW 2,000,000 (three million)” of the last parallel (Class 1) of the judgment of the court below as to “the penalty amount of KRW 2,00,000 (three million).” Thus, it is obvious that the Defendant’s appeal is erroneous and erroneous. Thus, it is ex officio in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.