The defendant shall be innocent.

A. The misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine merely spreads the victim’s flaps by misunderstanding the Defendant’s flapsing, and did not assault the victim as stated in the facts charged in the instant case.

Even if the defendant's act constitutes an assault, the defendant's act constitutes a legitimate defense or a legitimate act to escape from the situation where the victim was subject to assault.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as above.

B. The sentence of the lower court (an amount of KRW 700,000) that is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the misapprehension of the legal principle or mistake of facts

A. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged on the grounds of the evidence indicated in its judgment.

B. The judgment of this court 1) The burden of proving the facts constituting an offence prosecuted in a criminal trial is to be borne by the prosecutor, and the conviction is to be based on evidence with probative value sufficient for a judge to have a reasonable doubt that the facts charged are true. Thus, if there is no such evidence, even if there is doubt as to the defendant's guilt, it is inevitable to determine the defendant's interest even if there is no such evidence (see Supreme Court Decision 2019Do17838, Apr. 9, 2020, etc.). The act of attack and defense has been committed in parallel between the fighting parties and the act of attacking against them, and it is common sense that it is difficult to deem that the act of attack and defense is called a "political act" for defense or constitutes a "political defense."

However, even if the outer fighting is viewed as one of the fightings, in fact one of the parties unilaterally commits an illegal attack and the other party protects himself from such attack and goes beyond it.