The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. There is no fact that the Defendant committed an assault against E (2014 High Court Decision 644), and there is no fact that the Defendant inflicted an injury on I.

(2014 fixed710). (b)

In conclusion, the defendant's act constitutes violence or injury.

Even if this is a passive defense against the preceding violence of E or I, it is not illegal because it constitutes legitimate self-defense under Article 21 of the Criminal Code or legitimate act under Article 20 of the Criminal Code.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, such as the judgment of the lower court on the assertion of mistake, E and I’s statement in the original trial, injury diagnosis, etc., the Defendant: (a) assaulted once the victim E and the mother of the victim on the hands-on hand-on hand-on hand-on hand-on hand-on hand-on hand-on hand-on on December 17, 2010; and (b) was hospitalized in the Eastern Hospital 509, which was hospitalized on December 17, 2010, with the victim I’s left hand-on-on hand-on hand-on which requires approximately two weeks medical treatment; and (c) thus, this part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

(B) The statements made by the victim in the investigative agency and the statement made by the court of the court below are mutually consistent and consistent with the defendant's investigation agency's partial statements, opinions, and the statement made in the injury diagnosis.

In full view of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of legal principles, it is difficult to view each act of the defendant against the victims in the facts charged of this case as a considerable act to defend the present infringement against the defendant or an passive act of resistance against the victims, which is not unlawful by social norms.