The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant merely committed an unilateral assault against the victim, and did not commit an assault, such as flabing the victim’s flab, or quibing the chest with hacks.

B. Legal reasoning is that the Defendant, by misapprehending the legal doctrine, committed a passive defense against the victim’s unilateral assault, constitutes a legitimate act or a legitimate defense.

(c)

The sentence (1,000,000 won) sentenced by the court below against the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the following circumstances acknowledged by the court below based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the defendant and the victim, namely, the pictures (the 10 pages of investigation records) taken by police officers dispatched after the Defendant and the victim sealed the victim, can be sufficiently acknowledged by the defendant, taking full account of the following facts: (a) the victim’s neck appears to have been flicked on the chest within a short time from the lower part of the chest; (b) the victim had consistently carried the victim’s flick, and stated from the investigation agency to the court that the defendant was able to have been flick on the chest; (c) the victim’s bodily injury diagnosis (37 pages of investigation records) was similar to the above upper part; and (d) the fact that the defendant inflicted an injury on the victim (the 37 pages of investigation records) on the victim’s upper part and lower part of the upper part of the front wall and the left part of the bar.

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

B. According to the materials, etc. submitted by the Defendant on June 25, 2017, prior to the instant crime, the Defendant filed 112 reports to the effect that the victim was at his/her own time, and on June 26, 2017, the victim and the victim’s wife intrudes on the dynamics of the Defendant and the victim, thereby damaging property, and the victim caused conflict.

However, the above facts alone are the defendant at the time of the crime of this case.