The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Legal principles (self-defense or legitimate act)’s act constitutes self-defense or legitimate act in order to defend the defendant’s fear that the victim D was at the expense of the victim D, and that the victim’s injury to the defendant.

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

2. Determination

A. In order to establish self-defense under Article 21 of the Criminal Act as to whether an act of self-defense or a legitimate act, the act of defense must be socially reasonable, taking into account all specific circumstances, such as the type, degree, method of infringement, and the type and degree of legal interest to be infringed by the act of self-defense (see Supreme Court Decision 92Do2540, Dec. 22, 1992). “Act which does not violate social norms” under Article 20 of the Criminal Act refers to an act which is permissible in light of the overall legal order or social ethics or social norms, and “act which is not contrary to social norms” refers to an act which is not in violation of social norms, and which act should be determined on an individual basis by comprehensively considering the following specific circumstances: (a) legitimacy of the motive or purpose of the act; (b) means or method of the act; (c) reasonableness of the means or method of the act; (d) third, balance between the protected interest and the protected interest; and (v) supplementary means or method of the act.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 86Do1764, Oct. 28, 1986). In light of the above legal principle, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the health team and the lower court, i.e., the victim was in a book with his/her own responsibility, and the defendant was in a position to see that he/she would be at will, and the victim was at will.