The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the mistake of facts on June 3, 2019, the Defendant did not assault the victim by creating a misunderstanding of facts, or by taking the victim into bees, as shown in this part of the facts charged.

B. As to the crime of assault around May 2019 by misapprehending the legal principles, the Defendant, at the time, who was at the time at two times after having been paid a buck from the victim, should have tried to raise an injury of face through the victim’s operation, etc., once again, to prevent the victim from committing an unjust attack, and this constitutes legitimate self-defense or legitimate act in order to prevent the victim’s unjust attack.

C. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment, etc.) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. On June 3, 2019, the victim made a consistent statement from the investigative agency to the court below that he/she was subject to the assault from the Defendant, such as this part of the facts charged, with regard to the assault committed on June 3, 2019, and the content thereof can be sufficiently detailed and detailed.

The fact that the defendant was aware of the victim at the time of the police and the prosecutor's office is more so true.

The judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty on this part of the facts charged is just, and there is no error of mistake of facts as alleged by the defendant

B. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below regarding the assertion of legal principles, at the time of the crime of assault around May 2019, the victim first set up against the defendant at the time of the crime of assault, and let the victim cut the chest part of the victim's chest under the string stairs. Although the victim first assaulted the defendant, the above act of the defendant is more active tangible power against the victim rather than passive defensive act.