The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant did not leep the victim’s head by taking the victim’s head on an equal basis, batling bats, and bathers.

B. In the misapprehension of the legal principle, the defendant misunderstanding the victim's head or flapsing on an equal basis.

Even if this was done in the course of resistance against the victim who assaults the defendant, the illegality is dismissed as it constitutes a legitimate defense or a legitimate act.

(c)

The punishment (700,000 won) of the judgment of the court below that was unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. Considering the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of assessing the credibility of a witness’s statement in accordance with the spirit of the substantial direct trial principle adopted by the Criminal Procedure Act as an element of the trial-oriented principle, the first instance court’s decision was clearly erroneous in its determination on the credibility of the witness statement made by the first instance court in light of the content of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court.

Unless there are extenuating circumstances to see the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance trial and the result of the further examination of evidence conducted until the closing of the appellate trial, the appellate court should not arbitrarily reverse the first instance judgment on the sole ground that the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance court is different from the appellate court’s judgment (see Supreme Court Decision 201Do5313, Jun. 14, 2012). (b) The Defendant asserted that the above grounds for appeal were the same, and the lower court, on the grounds as stated in its reasoning, determined that the victim’s legal statement made by the lower court cannot be accepted, on the ground that the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance cannot be accepted.

The judgment of the court below is recorded.