Defendant

Since misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles are the defendant's act constitutes self-defense or necessity of necessity, it is not illegal because the defendant's act constitutes self-defense.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous and erroneous.

The punishment sentenced by the court below on unreasonable sentencing (three million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

The punishment sentenced by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

Judgment

In light of the background of the instant case acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court regarding the Defendant’s assertion of mistake and misapprehension of legal doctrine, the degree and method of assault committed by the victim, the content of the damage the Defendant complained against immediately after the instant case, and the degree of injury, etc., it cannot be deemed that the illegality of the Defendant’s act constitutes self-defense

The above assertion is not accepted.

It is reasonable to respect the case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the judgment of the court of first instance on the assertion of unfair sentencing by the defendant and prosecutor, and where the sentencing of the court of first instance does not deviate from

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In light of the following: (a) there is no new circumstance to change the sentence of the lower court in the trial; and (b) the grounds for sentencing as stated by the lower court are as follows: (a) comprehensively taking into account the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, records of the crime, the method and circumstances of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, the sentence imposed by the lower court was conducted within the reasonable scope of discretion; and (c) the sentence is not heavier

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so ordered.