An ACT Supreme Court jury found Haralambos Korres guilty of assault occasioning actual bodily harm last year.

But they acquitted the Australian National University researcher of a more serious charge of recklessly inflicting grievous bodily harm.

Korres struck rival player Simon Hui during a heated lunch-time indoor soccer match at the Australian National University in May 2008.

Mr Hui suffered a large gash and four broken teeth.

Korres was convicted of the attack and placed on a 12-month good-behaviour order.

But he appealed the conviction on two grounds.

Defence lawyers argued the jury’s verdict of guilty was unsafe and the trial judge had misdirected the jury.

Three ACT Court of Appeal judges – Justice Hilary Penfold, Justice John Nield, and Justice Robert Buchanan – heard the appeal in August and reserved their judgment.

But the three unanimously threw out the challenge in a decision published on Friday.

The judges found it was open to the jury to reach the guilty verdict on the evidence before them.

“I am satisfied, having regard to the nature of our task, that it was open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant was guilty of having assaulted the complainant,” Justice Nield wrote.

The three judges found the trial judge’s charge to the jury was a departure from standard directions as to acceptance or rejection of a witness’s evidence.

But Justice Nield and Justice Robert Buchanan found no miscarriage of justice had occurred so did not make a finding on whether the direction was inappropriate.

Justice Hilary Penfold found part of the trial judge’s directions were inappropriate and likely to confuse a jury.

“While the appellant’s complaint about his honour’s direction about evidence might in the abstract have been decided in the appellant’s favour, no substantial miscarriage of justice has actually occurred in this case,” Justice Penfold wrote.