We reverse the part on the part of serious injury.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

Defendant.

A. In relation to the injury (misunderstanding of facts), in addition to that where the defendant was faced with the victim by pushing the victim, it is confirmed that the defendant left a place where there is a considerable distance from the entrance, and that the defendant was moving, leading the victim's strekes, leading the victim's strekes, thereby causing the defendant's strekes, etc., and the act of attack is also an injury to the defendant, and such act of attack cannot meet the requirements for legitimate act, there is an error of mistake of facts in the judgment of the court below that acquitted the defendant

B. As to the act of assault (misunderstanding of the legal doctrine), the crime of this case was committed by the victim by taking garbage, etc. from the victims solely on the ground that there is a dispute over the same business, and prevented the victim from exercising his legitimate right. The Defendant’s act did not meet the requirements

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that the illegality of this part of the facts charged is dismissed as a justifiable act is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

(c)

On the part of damage of property (misunderstanding of facts), according to the on-site situation photograph, the amount of garbage dosages is reasonable, and the victim can request the vehicle after the removal of garbage due to the excessive degree of garbage dosages. Since the victim confirmed the remaining parts of the body of the vehicle after the third, this part of the facts charged is sufficiently proved by the above photograph and the victim's statement, etc.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the facts charged is erroneous and erroneous.

Before making a judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, the prosecutor examined “injury” under Article 257(1) of the facts charged against the Defendant as “Assault” in the trial of the court below, and the applicable provision of the law as “Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act” under “Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act,” and applied for changes in the contents of the facts charged as follows, and the court applied for changes in the contents of the facts charged, thereby changing the subject of the judgment.