[상해][공1983.4.1.(701),535]
The case holding that there was a lack of illegality as an act of attempted to escape from an improper attack.
As a result of an appraisal that the injured party filed a complaint against the Defendant’s frighting and cutting down the frighting fact on the floor of the Defendant’s house, he saw the Defendant’s bath and frighting the face three times with his fingers, and tried to dump the Defendant’s frighting and cutting the fright for four weeks with his finger face. As such, in a case where the Defendant dumped and dumped his frighting the frighten, and dumped the Defendant’s frighting, and dumping the flab, and dump to the Defendant, he dumped the Defendant, the Defendant’s act was committed by the Defendant to escape from the other party’s unfair attack, and such act was deemed an act lacking illegality in light of the circumstances,
Article 21 of the Criminal Act
Defendant
Prosecutor
Daegu District Court Decision 82No85 delivered on June 18, 1982
The appeal is dismissed.
The prosecutor's grounds of appeal are examined.
The court below affirmed the judgment of the court of first instance that acquitted the defendant on the ground that the victim (50 years of age) was an act of defending the victim's body's current unfair infringement, and there is considerable reason to do so. The court below affirmed the judgment of the court of first instance that found the defendant not guilty on the ground that the defendant's act was an act of defending the victim's physical injury, and there is no error of law in the process of evidence preparation which was conducted in the above fact-finding, and there was no error of law in the above fact-finding process, and in fact-finding under the above facts-finding, the defendant's act was about to escape from the other party's improper attack, and then saw the defendant's eye and face with 4 weeks face, and continued to kill the defendant. Thus, the court below found the defendant not guilty on the ground that the defendant's act did not go beyond the other party's act and did not constitute an unlawful attack, and it did not err in the misapprehension of legal principles as well as the circumstances and purpose, intent, etc.
Therefore, the appeal by the prosecutor is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Shin Jong-young (Presiding Justice)