A. The Defendant, by misapprehending the legal principles, removed the number plate of I Bus (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) according to the direction of E, the representative director of D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”), and D was in an imminent situation where the license for passenger transport would be revoked unless the above number plate was recovered. Thus, the Defendant’s removal of the above number plate is a legitimate act.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty on the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court (an amount of KRW 2,00,000) that is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Judgment on the misunderstanding of the legal doctrine 1) An act that does not violate the social norms stipulated in Article 20 of the Criminal Act

The term "act" refers to an act acceptable in light of the overall spirit of legal order or social ethics or social norms surrounding it, and whether certain act is justified as an act that does not contravene social norms, and the illegality is excluded, should be determined individually by considering and reasonably under specific circumstances. Thus, to recognize a justifiable act, the following requirements should be met: (i) legitimacy of the motive or purpose of the act; (ii) reasonableness of the means or method; (iii) balance between the interests of protection and infringement; (iv) urgency; and (v) supplementaryness that there is no other means or method than the act (see Supreme Court Decisions 2003Do300, Sept. 26, 2003; 2003Do4934, Jun. 25, 2004). According to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the victim was instructed by the defendant to operate the vehicle of this case by the representative director prior to the crime of this case; and (ii) around 19, 201.