The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 400,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the defendant went back to the victim without permission from the defendant's office, but the victim does not comply with it.

There is a fact that the victim gets in the face of theme to be drawn up, and the victim gets in the body and gets in the body of the part and the body of the victim as the victim gets out of the house. As stated in the facts charged in this case, there is no fact that the victim inflicted an injury on the victim by putting the breath of the victim's breath and slaging it, such as the instant facts charged.

In addition, since the victim did not comply with the defendant's legitimate withdrawal request, the defendant's act constitutes a justifiable act.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles.

On April 7, 2015, the Defendant: (a) requested that “A would have talked with the Defendant; and (b) he would be satisfing on the road” in the Defendant’s residence located in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu; (c) the Defendant used the victim by satisfing the Defendant’s satfage while doing a dispute.

Before the judgment on the grounds for appeal is made ex officio, the prosecutor shall keep the first facts charged in the trial, and the name of the offense against the defendant in the preliminary case shall be stated as assaulted by Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act and Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act. The application of the law shall be construed as “Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act and Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act,” and the following facts charged shall be added to the indictment, and

As examined below, this Court found the Defendant guilty of the conjunctive facts charged, so the judgment of the court below that only the primary facts charged can no longer be maintained.

However, despite the above reasons for reversal ex officio, the defendant's mistake and misapprehension of legal principles still present.