A. In light of the fact that the Defendant had the intention of assaulting a mistake or misunderstanding of legal principles, and did not pressing the victim’s hand, and only took hand in order to prevent the damage of documents, the crime of assault is not established pursuant to Article 20 of the Criminal Act.

B. Of the sentencing department, the sentence of the lower court (a fine of KRW 300,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine the judgment of the court below on the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles. The evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below can recognize the same facts as the time of original adjudication, and further, the defendant's act of pressing the victim's hands before the labor inspector, who is a special judicial police officer, before the labor inspector, in order to force the victim to force the victim's documents, is not an unlawful attack against others, which can be permitted by social norms. Thus, the judgment of the court below which convicted the defendant of the facts charged is proper, and there is

Therefore, we accept the defendant's argument.

B. Determination on the argument during the sentencing may be taken into account: (a) the Defendant appears to have committed contingent crimes; and (b) the fact that there was no record of punishment for the same criminal offense; (c) on the other hand, the restoration of damage was not achieved; (d) the lower court sentenced to the reduction of the fine (500,000 won) by the summary order; and (e) the lower court did not determine that the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable when examining the various conditions of sentencing specified in the pleadings, such as the Defendant’s age, character

Therefore, we cannot accept the defendant's argument during the sentencing.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.