A. The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles, although the defendant did not commit assault against the victim and was unilaterally assaulted.

B. The sentence (one million won of fine) imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court, based on the evidence duly adopted and examined, found the following facts and circumstances, i.e., ① the victim D who is an employee of T Security Business entity and the Defendant operating a cellphone store discussed the re-preparation of the security contract due to the merger between security business entities, which had been subject to criminal punishment of a fine of KRW 3 million due to the Defendant’s injury in the course of demanding new benefits (D also was subject to criminal punishment due to the instant crime of injury to the Defendant), ② the Defendant asserted that he unilaterally expressed that he had expressed an desire and assault against D. However, at the time of the police investigation, the Plaintiff sent D with the re-preparation of the contract with the Defendant, and at the time of the re-preparation of the contract with D, was unable to reach the contract. The Defendant believed that “The Defendant did not have any desire to use the phone with his desire to use the phone,” and thereafter, the Defendant made it difficult for the Defendant to use the phone to use the phone with his desire to use the phone as it was “D.”