An applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

A. The Defendant, at the time of the occurrence of the instant case, committed mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles only one time and did not commit any other act, and the Defendant’s act constitutes self-defense or excessive defense against the victim interfering with the Defendant’s snow.

B. The lower court’s sentence of an unreasonable sentencing (a fine of KRW 300,000) against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. Determination of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles must be made on the assertion of facts that an act is to be recognized as legitimate self-defense under Article 21 of the Criminal Act. Whether the act of defense is socially reasonable should be determined by taking into account all specific circumstances, such as the type and degree of legal interests infringed by the act, method of infringement, the completion of the act, and the type and degree of legal interests infringed by the act of defense (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Do2168, Mar. 15, 2017). Furthermore, even though there was an act to defend the infringement under the objective premise of self-defense as to his or another person's legal interests at the time of the act was conducted, and it constitutes excessive defense (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do1006, Feb. 14, 2008).