The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant did not have any intention to injure another person.

B. The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine as to whether the Defendant was a legitimate act, since the Defendant committed an offense against the victim to prevent the Defendant from taking a bath against the victim.

C. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant may recognize the fact that the Defendant fighting was conducted with the victim with the wheels of the other party, etc., and the intent of the Defendant’s injury can be sufficiently recognized in light of the background and method of such fighting.

Furthermore, the establishment of the crime of injury does not require sufficient awareness of assault, which is the cause of the injury, to the existence of the intention to cause the injury (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 9Do4341, Jul. 4, 2000). As long as the defendant recognizes the assault, even if the defendant did not have the intention to cause the injury, it does not affect the establishment of the crime of injury.

In the end, the defendant's assertion on this is without merit.

B. It is difficult to view that the Defendant’s act constitutes a justifiable act that does not go against the social norms in light of the details, methods, etc. of the instant fighting match prior to the determination of the misapprehension of

The defendant's assertion on this is without merit.

C. If there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court’s judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, the lower court, based on the foregoing legal doctrine, determined the sentence by comprehensively taking account of the various circumstances as stated in its reasoning.

In addition to the circumstances found by the court below, there are new circumstances to change the sentence of the court below.