The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles 1) The Defendant did not have caused the victim’s flab and flab with flab or with walls. 2) The Defendant only flabing the victim’s flab in order to control the flabing from the victim in advance. This constitutes legitimate self-defense or legitimate act.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the relevant legal principles and the content of the judgment of the court of first instance, and the evidence duly examined in the court of first instance, the judgment of the court of first instance on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the court of first instance shall not be deemed to have been clearly erroneous or, except in exceptional cases where it is deemed that maintaining the judgment of the court of first instance on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the court of first instance is significantly unfair, considering the results of the first instance examination and the results of additional evidence examination conducted by the time of closing argument in the appellate trial, the appellate court shall not reverse without permission the judgment of the court of first instance on the ground that the first instance on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the court of first instance is different from the judgment of the appellate court.

(Supreme Court Decision 2010Do3846 Decided June 24, 2010). The Defendant also asserted the same in the lower court. The lower court examined the victim E as a witness and found the Defendant guilty of the facts constituting a crime in the original trial by recognizing the credibility of the examination.

Even if the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below is closely examined in light of the above legal principles, it cannot be found that the court below found the credibility of the victim's statement, a witness of the court below, to be significantly unfair.

In addition, H of the trial witness is the defendant, who is the principal of the restaurant as stated in the facts charged at the time, who is either sees other customers or sees a restaurant.