The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Of the facts charged of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, in the case of assault or bodily injury, the victim was under the influence of alcohol and the act of the defendant does not go beyond his own, so there is no causation between the defendant's act and the result

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles: (a) The defendant asserted the same purport as the reasons for appeal in the original judgment; and (b) the court below rejected the above argument in detail under the title "decision on the argument of the defendant and his defense counsel". In comparison with the records, the judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as alleged by the defendant. (b) The argument of misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles is without merit.

B. According to the records on the assertion of unfair sentencing, the court below determined the punishment in consideration of various sentencing reasons, including the fact that the result from the crime was very significant, the damage was not recovered, the records of punishment for the same kind of crime were several times, the partial misunderstandings, and the health conditions, etc. (ii) there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the judgment of the court below as the new sentencing materials have not been submitted at the trial of the court below, and even considering the various sentencing reasons revealed in the oral argument, the court below’s sentencing is too excessive and it does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. Therefore, the argument on unreasonable sentencing is without merit.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is without merit.