Of the defendant cases, the acquittal part of the defendant case is reversed.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the charge is not guilty.

A. The lower court erred by misapprehending the fact that the Defendant’s act interfered with the duty of the victim’s security by finding the victim’s face, assaulting the victim’s face once, and obstructing the victim’s duty of maintaining the security by exercising force, such as abusing force, etc., even though it was found that the victim’s act was obstructed by finding the victim’s face at the office where the Defendant and the victim’s care and custody applicant (hereinafter “Defendant”) were working at the victim’s office where the victim’s K used for the purpose of maintaining the security.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (eight months of imprisonment) is too uncomfortable.

B. On August 23, 2015, Defendant 1 (the Defendant’s use of assault against the victim D) did not assault the victim’s face by taking the victim’s face once on one occasion on August 23, 2015, and on August 27, 2015, the victim was pushed the victim out of the convenience store, and there was no assault by five times the victim.

Nevertheless, on August 23, 2015, the lower court, by misunderstanding the facts, assaulted the victim’s face at one time on August 23, 2015, and assaulted the victim’s face, neck, chest, etc. at five times on August 27, 2015.

The lower court erred.

2) The Defendant’s act constitutes a legitimate defense or legitimate act even if it is acknowledged that the Defendant committed an assault against the said victims as in the facts charged.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the defense of a party or a legitimate act, thereby not falling under the defense of a party or a legitimate act.

The lower court erred.

3) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The part of the Defendant’s acquittal is not guilty.