Therefore, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant on the ground that it constitutes a justifiable act under Article 20 of the Criminal Act even though the defendant inflicted an injury upon the victim in the course of illegal arrest.

2. In light of the circumstances cited by the lower court as the grounds for determining that the Defendant’s act constitutes a justifiable act, the lower court’s determination is justifiable, and the Prosecutor’s assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine is without merit.

(1) The Defendant was her kicker from the victim on the date and place stated in the facts charged.

② Not only the Defendant, but also the Defendant’s spouse in the same place, was unaware of the personal information of the victim. The victim tried to escape from the scene after her bucking.

③ The Defendant was unable to escape from the victim by putting the two arms of the victim, and turned the shoulder over from the victim to the victim, and began to take the double arms on the part of the victim.

④ Even after that, the Defendant was still trying to attack the Defendant, and was under the control of the victim by taking advantage of the victim’s speech and behavior at that time, it cannot be deemed unreasonable for the Defendant to have made such judgment unreasonable.

(5) The defendant was under the control of the victim for about three minutes until the police called up, immediately after the police called up, transferred the victim to the police, and there is no other evidence to deem that the defendant's suppression exceeded a considerable degree.

3. Article 364 of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that the prosecutor’s appeal for conclusion is groundless.