Excessive Self-Defense in Battery Case Regarding Martial Arts Training

The appellant was convicted of simple battery committed in an excessive self-defense situation after striking the complainant, who had first grabbed the appellant's arm and raised a fist to strike him, resulting in a nasal fracture. The court reasoned that when assessing the proportionality of a self-defense measure under Articles 15 and 16 of the Criminal Code, the specific circumstances of the defender, including their training, must be considered; as the appellant was an experienced martial arts instructor, he should have employed a less dangerous and readily available defensive technique, such as a passive block or a controlled counter, rather than executing a direct and powerful blow to the face, meaning the application of excessive force justified the finding of a self-defense excess, not a full acquittal.