The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles are unilaterally assaulted by the victim, and there was no fact that the victim has exercised the force of force as stated in the facts charged. However, it merely constitutes legitimate self-defense or legitimate act because the victim who assaults the defendant by harming the part of the defendant's timber, etc.

Nevertheless, the court below found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (two million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) As to the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, an attack and defense was conducted annually between the fighting parties, and the act of defense was in the nature of both attack and self-defense, it would normally be difficult to deem that only one party’s act was a legitimate act for defense or self-defense by removing only one party’s act. However, even if one party appears to have fighting, in fact, one party unilaterally commits an attack and the other party uses tangible power as a means of resistance to protect himself/herself from such attack and escape therefrom, unless it is deemed that the act is a new affirmative attack, it is reasonable to allow under the social concept so long as it is not deemed to be a new affirmative attack (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Do12958, Feb. 11, 2010). In other words, the following circumstances recognized by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, the victim, at the investigative agency and court, and at the court below, the victim, “as the Defendant and the victim did not have any dispute about the settlement of the situation between the Defendant and the victim.”