A. In so doing, the Defendant is deemed to have inflicted an injury on the victim as stated in the judgment below in order to oppose the Defendant by assaulting the victim E first, and constitutes self-defense.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles in finding guilty of the facts charged.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (700,000 won of a fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In a case where it is reasonable to view that the perpetrator’s act of judgment as to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal principles is a self-defense, rather than for defending the victim’s unfair attack, and that the perpetrator first fighted with the intent of attack, and went against it, the perpetrator’s act constitutes self-defense.

(2) In light of the following circumstances, the Defendant’s act constitutes a self-defense to defend the victim’s legal interests by taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the motive and circumstance leading up to fighting; (b) the circumstances before and after fighting; and (c) the situation at the time of the Defendant’s assault and the degree of injury to the victim; and (d) it is reasonable to deem that the Defendant’s act has the nature of an attack as an affirmative attack beyond the limit of passive defense against the victim’s wrongful attack; and (b) thus, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant’s act constitutes self-defense to defend the victim’s legal interests.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of legal principles is without merit.

B. The Defendant’s decision on the assertion of unfair sentencing is an unfavorable circumstance against the Defendant, in light of the Defendant’s denial of the crime and the attitude of the instant act and the degree of injury, etc.

However, the judgment of the court below shall be sentenced in Korea by the defendant.