The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal is that the victim’s act constitutes self-defense and thus, the victim was spreaded to the victim in order to escape the defendant, and the victim was in the situation where the victim was unable to continue to attack the defendant, and there was no injury on the victim’s hand, and the defendant’s act constitutes self-defense (legal scenarios).

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the records of this case as to the assertion of mistake of facts are examined. In other words, the victim has consistently made a statement about the criminal facts from the investigative agency to the court of original trial on the day of this case, the circumstance of the defendant's assaulted against the victim, the process and method of assaulting the victim, etc., and the credibility of the statement is recognized, and the defendant also recognized the fact that the victim was injured by the victim who was injured by the victim. In full view of the fact that the victim was treated and treated immediately at the hospital due to this case, it is consistent with the victim's statement, and that the victim was sufficiently recognized the criminal facts of the same contents as the criminal facts stated in the judgment of the court below. Thus, the above argument of mistake of facts by the defendant is rejected.

B. In light of the background and method of the instant crime, victim’s injury part and degree, the relationship between the Defendant and the victim, the victim’s health condition, and the easiness of avoidance, etc. acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the victim had attempted to launch the Defendant, such as the Defendant’s assertion.

Even if the defendant's act was an active attack beyond the passive limit of defense, it is reasonable to view that the defendant's act had the nature of an active attack.