The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles when the victim defends the victim from assaulting the defendant first, which constitutes self-defense, the court below found the victim guilty of the facts charged in this case. The court below erred by misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment with labor for four months) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the defendant's act is deemed as an act committed by the victim's intent of attack beyond a mere means of defense and does not constitute self-defense, in consideration of the circumstances surrounding the crime in this case and the situation at the time of the crime. The defendant's act is deemed as an act committed by the victim's intent of attack beyond a mere means of defense, and it cannot be deemed as self-defense.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. The lower court, as seen above, determined the sentence by taking into account the circumstances favorable to the Defendant, favorable to the Defendant, and the recommended sentencing guidelines for the enactment of the Supreme Court Sentencing Committee.

There is no circumstance that the lower court’s sentencing is deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion or that it is unreasonable to maintain the lower court’s sentencing as it is when comprehensively considering the conditions of sentencing, the applicable sentencing criteria, and the sentencing criteria in the trial.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Otherwise, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, and the instant case.