The judgment below

The guilty portion shall be reversed.

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant does not have any misunderstanding of facts against the victim, such as the facts charged.

B. The Defendant expressed the victim’s desire as stated in the facts charged, even if there were errors in the legal doctrine.

This constitutes a legitimate act because it was conducted in the course of a defense against the illegal demand of the victim, a police officer.

C. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court: (a) around 22:45 on June 13, 2017, the Defendant 12 reported that “A bus article, who is a police officer, is unable to drive a bus because he/she is out of the language assault,” and (b) the victim and H, who was called the front bus stop, was called the victim and H, and the Defendant, who was called on the bus, was asked to talk about the victim’s complaint about G with a large sound, and received a voluntary demand from the victim and H to do so; (c) on June 13, 2017, at around 22:47, G reported that “A will not drive a bus because he/she was out of the language assault of the victim, and thus, he/she had the victim and H voluntarily refused to do so; and (d) the Defendant had the victim and the police officer voluntarily refused to do so; and (e) the Defendant had the victim and the Defendant voluntarily refused to do so.

I would like to say.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is just, and there is no error of law by mistake of facts alleged by the defendant.

B. We examine the misapprehension of the legal principle.