The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date of the final judgment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles 1) Although the victim G was not injured by the Defendant’s act in this case, the court below found the Defendant guilty of violating the Punishment of Violences, etc. (a collective injury with a deadly weapon, etc.) against the above victim G. 2) The Defendant was suffering from unexpected consequences suitable for the victim E’s entry, which was next to the Defendant, and at the time there was no criminal intent as to the Defendant’s violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. (a collective injury with a deadly weapon, etc.) against E.

3) The Defendant’s act constitutes self-defense, as it occurred in the course of defending against the harmful act of the victim G, and constitutes self-defense. Even when the Defendant’s act of defending the Defendant’s above goes beyond its degree at night or under other extraordinary circumstances, it cannot be punishable as an excessive defense, which is caused by fear, bad faith, entertainment, or confusion under the night or other extraordinary circumstances. B. The Defendant was in a state of mental and physical disability by drinking only at the time of each of the instant crimes. C. The sentence of the lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing (three years of suspension of execution in one year and six months, and community service work is excessively unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal for ex officio determination.

A prosecutor applied for amendments to a bill of amendment to the indictment with the content of changing the “spawn’s disease,” among the facts charged in the instant case, to “spawn’s disease,” and since this court permitted this and changed the subject of the judgment, the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained.

However, the defendant's mistake, misunderstanding of legal principles, and the argument of mental disability still is subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined.

B. As to whether the victim G was injured by the Defendant’s act, the crime of injury is committed.