The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

가. 사실 오인, 법리 오해 1) 퇴거 불응 피고인은 당시 시댁 식구가 문을 열어 주어 피해자의 주거지로 들어갔고 피해 자로부터 퇴거요구를 받은 사실이 없음에도 원심은 이 부분 공소사실을 유죄로 판단하였으니, 원심판결에는 사실 오인의 위법이 있다.

2) Although the Defendant, as stated in the facts charged, did not inflict an injury upon the Victim H, the lower court convicted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts.

3) The Defendant who injured the victim E did not inflict any injury upon the victim E as stated in the facts charged, and even if such fact is acknowledged, this constitutes a passive defensive act, which constitutes a legitimate defense or legitimate act, but the lower court convicted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine or misapprehending the legal doctrine.

(1) The court shall decide to the extent of supplement of the grounds for appeal specified in the reasons for appeal, including the summary of the defense counsel's argument, which has been submitted after the lapse of the reasons for appeal, and shall not decide otherwise on any assertion not entirely

B. The sentencing of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1 Determination as to the assertion of mistake of facts, etc. 1) The following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the appellate court, i.e., the victim G, which consistently stated in the investigative agency that “A victim G was physically sound and several times due to the Defendant’s not going to leave, and H became disturbed while blocking the victim,” and ② was present at the time.

H and J also stated in the investigative agency and the court of the court below that “the victim was present to the effect that it would not enter the house of the defendant,” and ③ the victim’s statement.