A. Even though G, a party of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, tried to continue to operate a taxi, the victim considered that G was dangerous, and the Defendant damaged the convenience of taxi in order to stop the said taxi.

Therefore, the defendant's act is not illegal as self-defense or legitimate act.

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case, which affected the conclusion of the judgment of the court below by misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles.

B. In light of the overall circumstances of the instant case of unfair sentencing, the sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (one million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Although the Defendant alleged the same purport in the lower court’s judgment as to the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case by comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined, and rejected the Defendant’s aforementioned assertion on the grounds of detailed reasons in the “decision on the Defendant’s

Examining the above judgment of the court below in a thorough manner with the records, the court below's judgment that found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is just, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding facts or misunderstanding legal principles as alleged by the defendant. Thus, the above argument by the defendant is without merit.

B. The Defendant, while recognizing the facts of the instant crime itself, asserts that his mistake was caused by the risk of G’s life, did not repent of his mistake, the victim’s injury was not recovered, and all other conditions of sentencing, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, and circumstances after the commission of the instant crime.