A. Since the crime of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles committed in this case was committed by the victim D (hereinafter referred to as the "victim") with the victim's head first left in the victim's depression, and the defendant laid down the defendant's head head on the part of the defendant's ship to defend it, and the defendant was sold by the victim. Thus, this constitutes passive defensive act, which constitutes legitimate self-defense or legitimate act, the court below acknowledged that the defendant was injured by the victim as stated in the judgment of the court below. Thus, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to self-defense or legitimate act, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. In light of the following facts: (a) the victim of unreasonable sentencing did not properly guide the Defendant’s husband’s cruel suspicion, resulting in the Defendant’s attempt to confirm this case; (b) there were circumstances to consider the Defendant’s circumstances in the instant case; (c) the Defendant was suffering from an anti-competitive disability before 14 years ago; (d) the Defendant is currently in married life and is in the status of raising two daughters; and (e) the Defendant is an initial offender who had no previous conviction, the sentence (fine 500,000) imposed by the lower court is unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The "act that does not violate the social rules" under Article 20 of the Criminal Act regarding the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles refers to the act that can be accepted in light of the overall spirit of legal order, or the social ethics or social norms surrounding it, and what act is justified as a legitimate act that does not violate the social rules, and thus, it should be judged individually by rationally and reasonably considering the specific circumstances, and therefore, to be recognized as a legitimate act, the motive or purpose of the act is legitimate.