The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

A. The Defendant did not have committed a mistake of fact against the victim, and only was assaulted unilaterally by the victim at the time.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (fine 3,00,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances revealed according to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., (i) the victim was committed unilaterally by the defendant, and the defendant was consistently urged to have his face face part of the defendant, (ii) the police officer dispatched to the site of this case stated that the defendant was hacker under the influence of alcohol, and that he was hacker in the face of the victim, and that the defendant was hacker, and that the defendant was hacker, and the police officer dispatched to the site of this case stated that he was hacker in the face of the victim. (iii) Taking full account of the following circumstances, comprehensively of the fact that the defendant unilaterally hacked the victim, and stated that the victim was hacker, and that the victim was hacker in the face of the victim, and that the defendant was hacker in the inside of the victim.

This part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. The crime of this case of unfair sentencing is acknowledged as a favorable condition for the defendant, on the ground that the defendant's appearance by drinking the victim's face at one time, destroyed by a hacker from the floor while the hacker worn by the victim was injured by the victim's face at one time, and the degree of damage seems to be relatively minor.

However, the Defendant did not oppose the instant crime while denying it, and did not agree with the victim.