The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-misunderstanding is not a plucker or plucker of the victim's fingers.

The “one-time aggregate of five water units in need of six-time medical treatment” suffered by the victim is not caused by the Defendant’s act.

B. The misunderstanding of the legal doctrine affected the Defendant’s hair, breath, and assaulted the Defendant, and the Defendant affected the victim’s breath in order to block the Defendant’s breath, but the victim’s breath by returning his own left hand and cutting off his finger.

Such an act constitutes a passive defensive act and a legitimate defense.

[The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the judgment of the court below was erroneous in sentencing at the date of the first hearing of the court below, but the above argument cannot be viewed as a legitimate ground for appeal due to a new assertion made after the lapse of the period for appeal, although the court below's judgment was erroneous in sentencing.

Even if ex officio, the sentence of the court below is too excessive and thus is not unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court can sufficiently recognize the fact that the Defendant inflicted an injury on the victim by assaulting the victim as stated in the lower judgment.

Defendant’s assertion is not accepted.

(1) The aggrieved person consistently makes a statement from an investigative agency to the court of the court below that his/her fingers were cut off in the course of plucking, plucking, or plucking, the injured party’s fingers.

② The Defendant also acknowledges the fact that the victim’s losses are met.

③ In light of the body of the victim’s fingers, the degree of injury, etc., the victim was married to the victim during the process of exceeding the victim’s assertion.

It is difficult to see that the fingers were cut off in the course of intending to cut off the fingers like the victim's statement.

It is reasonable to view it.

(4) Victims shall be at the hospital.