The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant was not aware of the victim’s face by hand, thereby harming the victim’s face.

B. The Defendant, by misapprehending the legal doctrine, abused a victim to defend the victim by suffering undue violence from the victim. Thus, the Defendant’s above act constitutes a legitimate defense.

(c)

The sentence of the lower court (one million won in penalty) against the illegal defendant in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant

A. The following circumstances revealed through evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below regarding factual misunderstanding, i.e., the victim suffered violence from the defendant at the time of the instant case by the same method as the facts charged, relatively consistent until the court below rendered a relatively consistent judgment.

According to the statement, ② the photograph taken immediately after the instant case (Evidence No. 12-3, 42 pages of evidence) and the medical certificate issued on the day of the instant case (Evidence No. 14 pages), the victim appears to have suffered an inspection on his/her face. ③ The Defendant also recognized that he/she was faced with the victim’s head in the elevator at the time of the instant case. However, it is sufficiently possible for the victim to suffer an inspection on the face of the victim in a narrow space, ④ the Defendant alleged to the effect that he/she committed an act of self-injury to the Defendant. However, in light of the fact that there is little possibility that a female victim voluntarily sent his/her face to the victim in order to file a false complaint against the Defendant, the Defendant can sufficiently recognize that he/she inflicted an injury on flaco and flaco with the victim.

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

B. As to the misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the injured party, as alleged by the Defendant.