피고인은 서울 강북구 C에서 ‘D헤어�’을 운영하는 사람으로, 2013. 12. 9. 17:35경 위 헤어� 옆에 있는 ‘E’에서 피해자 F(75세, 남)을 비롯한 일행들이 시끄럽게 떠든다는 이유로 위 부동산 업주를 불러내 “시끄러우니, 조용히 해 달라”고 말하였고, 이에 피해자가 위 D헤어샵으로 들어가 피고인에게 “딸 같은 년이 어디 노인네를 불러 뭐라고 하냐, 싸가지 없이”라고 하면서 피해자의 뒤통수를 주먹으로 2회 때리는 등 폭행하자, 이에 대항하여 피해자의 얼굴을 손톱으로 할퀴는 등 폭행하여 피해자에게 약 2주간의 치료를 요하는 안면부 타박상 및 찰과상 등의 상해를 가하였다.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the injury diagnosis certificate (F);

1. Relevant Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. Penalty fine of 500,000 won to be suspended;

1. Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act (50,000 won a day);

1. As to the defense counsel’s assertion under Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act (such as the fact that the victim has induced a crime, the background of the occurrence of the crime in this case, the circumstances before and after the crime, and the degree of injury) of the suspended sentence, the defense counsel asserts that the defendant’s act constitutes self-defense or legitimate act in the course of resisting the victim’s assault.

In light of all circumstances, such as the background of the crime revealed by the records of this case, the means and degree of the victim's injury to the defendant, the means and method of the defendant's act compared thereto, and the result of the act, the act of this case cannot be deemed to constitute a case where the defendant defends the defendant's current unfair infringement or has considerable reasons for preventing such infringement, and it violates the social rules.