A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles by the Defendant merely suffered from injury to the left-hand pelle executives due to provoking from the victim, and did not incur any injury to the victim, and even if the Defendant used certain physical power from the victim, it constitutes legitimate self-defense as an act to escape from the victim’s unfair violence. However, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. Even if not, the sentencing of the lower court (the fine of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the injury diagnosis report submitted by the victim of the crime of injury generally grasps the cause of the injury based on the victim's statement, stating the part and degree of the injury observed and judged by using medical professional knowledge, and it is insufficient to be evidence to directly prove the fact that the injury as stated therein was caused by the criminal act of the defendant. However, in a case where the date and time of the diagnosis of the injury are close to the time and the time of the occurrence of the injury, there is no circumstance to suspect the credibility of the injury, and where the part and degree of the injury alleged by the victim coincides with the cause and circumstance of the injury alleged by the victim, unless there is any special circumstance such as where the victim discovered any circumstance that the victim might suffer the injury differently from the third party due to violence or where the fact that the victim prepared a false diagnosis report is revealed, the injury diagnosis report shall be sufficient to prove the fact of the injury of the defendant along with the victim's statement and shall not be rejected without any reasonable ground.

Supreme Court Decision 2010Do12728 Decided January 27, 2011