폭행
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The gist of the grounds for appeal lies in the fact that the Defendant was frightening the victim D’s bat, but this constitutes self-defense by doing an act to defend the victim’s illegal attack.
Nevertheless, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts charged or by misunderstanding the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.
2. Determination
A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is that “The Defendant, around September 15, 201, demanded the payment of the victim D’s management expenses in front of the Nam-gu Incheon Ctel 903, Nam-gu, Incheon, Seoul, to breath in his hand and assaulted the victim once by bating fats.”
B. In full view of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below and the defendant's statement before and after the remanding of the case, the fact that the victim was found in the defendant's house and demanded the preparation of an explanatory note about the payment of overdue management expenses, and that the defendant and the victim, who are attached to the city flab with the defendant and the victim, are slicking each other, and the defendant was the victim once.
C. Meanwhile, in light of the background leading up to the occurrence of the instant case, the degree and method of the Defendant’s act, etc., the Defendant’s above act cannot be deemed as self-defense, as it has the nature of the act of attack.
Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.