The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds of appeal (legal scenario) is that the Defendant’s act constitutes self-defense under Article 21(1) of the Criminal Act, and thus, illegality is excluded.

Therefore, although the defendant's act does not constitute a crime, the court below found the defendant guilty. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. In a case where it is reasonable to view that the perpetrator’s act of attacked with one another’s intent to attack the victim’s unfair attack rather than to defend the victim’s unfair attack, and that the act of attacked with one another’s intent to attack and went against it, the act of attacked with the nature of the act of attack at the same time, and thus, it cannot be deemed as self-defense or excessive defense

(2) In light of the above legal principles, the court below's determination that the defendant's act of attack has the nature of or is concurrently engaged in an attack rather than defending an unfair attack, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below. Thus, the court below's determination that the defendant's act of attack has the nature of or is concurrently engaged in an attack rather than defending an unfair attack. Thus, the court below's determination that the defendant's act of attack has the nature of or is concurrently engaged in an attack.

In other words, it cannot be recognized as self-defense.

Therefore, we cannot accept the defendant's assertion that the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.