Nevertheless, the court below found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case, and the court below erred by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the court below acknowledged the fact that the defendant, as stated in the facts charged in this case, kneee, kneee of the defendant, placed the victim's left bridge one time, and used the victim's arms and assaults the victim's arms.

Although the defendant asserts that CCTV screen images were operated by the prosecutor as evidence, there is no circumstance to deem that CCTV screen images were compiled or operated as alleged by the defendant.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty is just, and the defendant's above assertion is not justified.

In order to recognize a legitimate act, requirements such as legitimacy of the motive or purpose of the act, reasonableness of the means or method of the act, balance of legal interests between the protected interest and infringed interest, urgency, and supplement that there is no other means or method than that of the act, and the motive and purpose of the act are justifiable solely on the ground that the defendant who assaults the victim was prevented from getting out of the convenience store.

It cannot be said that the means or methods are reasonable, and it does not seem that there is a balance between the defendant's interest and the victim's interest infringed.

Therefore, the defendant's act cannot be seen as a justifiable act.

In the court below, the defendant alleged that the defendant's selling of the victim was a justifiable act under the Criminal Act because he prevented the victim from getting out of the convenience store.

The court below held the defendant.