A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles constitute self-defense inasmuch as the victim committed an assault against the victim in order to see the victim's knife and knife his knife and knife his life, which constitutes self-defense.

Nevertheless, the court below found Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case. The court below erred by misunderstanding facts or by misapprehending legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (six months of imprisonment and one year of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the attack and defense act are continuously cross-sectioned between the persons who conduct attack and defense, and the act of defense has the nature of both areas where the act of attack is committed at the same time, so it is common to say that either party’s act is a legitimate act for defense, or it is difficult to view that it falls under self-defense.

However, even if a person appears to be stimulated in appearance, if one party unilaterally commits an illegal attack and the other party uses a tangible object as a means of resistance to protect himself/herself from such unlawful attack and escape therefrom, in light of the circumstances leading up to the act, its purpose and means, and the intent of the actor, etc., as long as the act does not go beyond the limit of passive defense, it shall be deemed that the illegality is excluded as an act which is reasonable and acceptable by social norms.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 84Do1440, Sept. 11, 1984). However, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant's face is the victim's face when he spite spite spite spite spite spite spite spite spite spite spite spite spite spite spite, etc.