The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the summary of the grounds of appeal (the fact-finding) and the statement of the victim, etc., although it is difficult to deem that the defendant's act of assault at the time of the instant case was an active attack and satisfies the complementaryness or minimum infringed nature, which is the requisite of self-defense, the court below acquitted the charges of this case, the court below erred by misapprehending

2. Determination

(a)it is common that between the persons making the same fighting match, the act of attack and the act of defense has been committed annually, and the act of defense has the nature of both sides of the act of attack at the same time, so it is difficult to regard it as a legitimate act for defense or self-defense by leaving only one of the acts of the parties;

However, in a case where one party unilaterally commits an illegal attack and the other party uses tangible force as a means of resistance to protect himself/herself from such attack and escape therefrom, even if the act is deemed to be a new affirmative attack, the illegality is dismissed as it is reasonable to allow under the social concept (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 84Do1440, Sept. 11, 1984; 99Do3377, Oct. 12, 199; 2009Do12958, Feb. 11, 2010).

In light of the records, a thorough examination of the evidence relationship of this case based on the above legal principles is consistent with all of the facts finding and determination by the court below, and further, the defendant's act at the time of this case is socially accepted by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the trial court (the witness H's trial statement at the trial court, the 119 emergency medical service log, the copy of the medical record).