The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. 항소 이유의 요지( 사실 오인 내지 법리 오해) 피해자가 먼저 피고인에 대하여 심한 욕설을 하여 피고인도 방어적으로 욕설을 하였을 뿐이고, 피해자가 먼저 피고인을 향하여 삿대질을 하여 피고인이 손가락을 구부리라는 의미에서 빈 물병으로 가볍게 치는 시늉을 하였을 뿐, 피고인은 피해자를 폭행한 사실이 없음에도 이 사건 공소사실을 유죄로 인정한 원심은 사실을 오인하거나 법리를 오해한 위법이 있다.

2. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, the fact that the Defendant took a bath on April 8, 2016 on the grounds that the injured person in the digital data room on the third floor of the D Library 3 was slicker using the slickner and slicker, and sufficiently recognized that the injured person committed assault by taking the injured person’s slick damage into plastic water disease, and the materials submitted by the Defendant at the trial alone do not interfere with the recognition of the above crime.

B. As to whether the Defendant’s act constitutes a justifiable act that does not violate the social norms, in order to recognize a justifiable act, the following requirements should be met: (a) legitimacy of the motive or purpose of the act; (b) reasonableness of the means or method of the act; (c) balance between the interests of protection and infringement; (d) urgency; and (e) supplementary nature that there is no other means or method than the act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Do300, Sept. 26, 2003). As stated in the judgment of the court below, the motive or purpose of the Defendant’s act of assault cannot be deemed to be justifiable or unreasonable; and (b) the remaining requirements of the act of a political party are satisfied

Therefore, it is difficult to see that the defendant's act constitutes a justifiable act.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is without merit and Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act is not reasonable.