The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In the process of misunderstanding the facts with the victim, the victim's eye was knife in the victim's fingers, resulting in the victim's left eye, but the victim's knife in the process of defending the victim's knife and defending the victim's knife with the victim's knife, so the victim's knife is intentionally knife with the victim's left eye. Thus, at the time of committing the crime of this case, the victim did not have any intention to inflict any injury on the victim.

B. The sentence sentenced by the first instance court of unfair sentencing (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The first instance court's judgment as to the assertion of mistake of facts is recognized by the evidence duly adopted and investigated as follows: ① With respect to the situation at the time when the victim was investigated by the investigative agency, the victim fiffed from the defendant, and fiffed with fiff after the fiff. The victim fiffed with the appearance of the defendant fife with the fife with the fife with the fife with the fife with the fife with the fife with the fife with the fife with the fife with the fife with the fife with the fiff.

In this situation, the situation how we need to prepare is exchanged with each other, and the defendant must write down a low eye with his hand and then write down a rice plate.

The emblance of the defendant is the same as a rice plate after being found in a state where the defendant intentionally emblats a low eye due to his/her loss.

In the first instance court, the Defendant intentionally saw that he was fluored by the force of the Defendant’s hand, and that he was blicked. As such, the first instance court saw that he was fluord by the Defendant’s intention.

Because the rate of pressure from snow has been rapid, it is not a contingent but a part of it.