The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant did not err in mistake of facts, etc. that caused the victim’s face to be taken by drinking, the lower court determined otherwise, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, by misunderstanding of facts, and even if not, constitutes a defensive act against an unjust attack by the victim.

(B) The Defendant’s assertion is self-defense or legitimate action. (B)

The sentence of unfair sentencing (ten months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant asserted the same as the grounds for appeal in this part of the judgment below as to whether the Defendant was injured.

Accordingly, the lower court rejected this part of the Defendant’s assertion on the following grounds, based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, in view of the following facts: (a) the victim D made a relatively concrete statement at an investigative agency on the victim’s course and status; (b) the Defendant made a statement to the purport that he/she was aware of the fact that he/she was committed in an investigative agency; (c) the Defendant made a statement to the effect that he/she was unable to memory the specific circumstances; and (d) the F reported in 112 and 119 as well as H’s statement after the occurrence of the case conforms to the victim’s statement.

Examining the above judgment of the court below in comparison with the records of this case, the judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error of misconception of facts as alleged by the defendant.

B. In light of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court regarding self-defense or the assertion of legitimate act, the Defendant at the time of the instant case also recognized the fact that he was injured by the victim.

However, this evidence is recognized as a whole as follows: