A. The Defendant’s act constitutes a legitimate defense, inasmuch as the misunderstanding of legal principles unilaterally attacked by the victim, and the Defendant feel a threat to his/her life and defended the victim, and thus, the Defendant’s act constitutes a legitimate defense.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (one million won penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court also asserted that the Defendant was not guilty of the facts charged in the instant case with the same content as in the judgment of the lower court, but the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the grounds stated in its reasoning and convicted the Defendant of the facts charged in the instant case.

In light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the statement of the court below, the above judgment of the court below is just and there is an error of law by misunderstanding legal principles as alleged by the defendant in the judgment below.

It does not seem that it does not appear.

B. In light of the following: (a) examining the determination of the unfair argument of sentencing; and (b) taking into account the various sentencing conditions indicated in the instant records and arguments, the lower court’s sentence is too unreasonable even if considering the circumstances alleged by the Defendant on the grounds of appeal.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.