A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

A. There is no fact that the Defendant, with respect to the part of the injury inflicted on the victim F of misunderstanding of facts, committed a f in order to avoid the assault of F while in opposition against the joint assault of E and F, but did not go beyond F. Therefore, there was no fact that the Defendant inflicted injury, such as cerebral rheat, etc.

B. In light of the legal principles, even if it is recognized that the Defendant inflicted an injury on F as stated in the facts charged, it is merely a passive defense to oppose the violence of victims, and thus, the illegality should be avoided as self-defense.

C. The sentence (one million won of fine) imposed by the court below on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below in determining the assertion of mistake of facts: (i) The victim F consistently stated from the investigative agency to the court of the court below that “the defendant and E were tightly sealed,” and (ii) the defendant also stated that the victim E was blue in the process of wrapping up; (iii) the other victim E stated that the victim F was blue in the court of the court of the court below; (iv) the domestic witness G was not deemed to go beyond the victim F in the investigative agency and the court of the court of the court of the court of the court; (v) even if the defendant and E were made a statement that the victim F did not seem to go beyond the victim F, there is a possibility that the fighting between the defendant and the victim would not be deemed to go beyond the victim F; and (v) the injury part in the written diagnosis of injury was consistent with the parts asserted by the victim that the victim was injured, and the written diagnosis of injury was

In full view of the fact that there is no circumstance to deem that the injury of the victim was caused by another reason, etc., it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant has inflicted the same injury as the stated in the facts charged by pushing the victim under a elbow. Thus, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. Judgment on the misapprehension of the legal principle.