In the case of insult, and there is no fact that the Defendant expressed the victim’s desire as stated in the facts charged in the instant case.

However, even if it is not so, the sentencing of the lower court (fine of three million won) is too unreasonable.

2. In full view of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts regarding the offense of insult, it is sufficiently recognized that the Defendant insultd the victim with a large voice so that it can be heard by the residents by finding the victim's house over three times around August 14, 2012, as stated in the judgment of the court below.

Next, as to the assertion that the instant injury constitutes self-defense or legitimate act, in light of the health stand, the circumstances revealed by the above evidence, i.e., the circumstance where the Defendant found at the victim’s house without prior notice during night and the circumstance where the dispute occurred and the extent of the Defendant’s use of force and the degree of the injury inflicted on the victim, etc., the Defendant’s act of destroying the victim’s head debt up on the floor beyond the victim’s upper floor is a defense act and at the same time

As such, self-defense or legitimate act cannot be seen as a legitimate act.

Finally, considering the argument of unfair sentencing, the court below's sentencing is reasonable in light of various circumstances, including the motive and circumstance of the crime of this case, the circumstances after the crime of this case, the defendant's age, character and conduct, and environment, and the conditions of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments of this case.

3. If so, the defendant's appeal is justified.