The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual errors and misapprehension of legal principles) is as follows: (a) the Defendant is not guilty of having caused a fighting actively against the victim under the absence of “current unfair infringement” or the termination thereof; (b) there is lack reasonableness; and (c) the Defendant cannot be deemed to have committed excessive defense under Article 21(2) of the Criminal Act due to fear, bad faith, entertainment, or confusion in the night-time unstable circumstances; (d) however, the lower court acquitted the Defendant on the ground that the Defendant’s act constitutes self-defense or excessive defense, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

Judgment

A. We examine the existence and priority of “current unfair infringement” at the time of the instant case as to whether there was “current unfair infringement.”

Even if the commission of a crime has not yet started, it is difficult to defend by delaying the defense, or even after the crime reaches the formal number of times, if the infringement of legal interests continues at the site, it shall be deemed that there is a situation where there is "the present unfair infringement".

원심이 적법하게 채택하여 조사한 증거들에 의하면, ① 피고인이 이 사건 당시 공원 벤치에 누워 잠이 들었는데 누군가 피고인의 바지 주머니에 손을 넣어 지갑을 빼가려는 촉감을 느끼고 깜짝 놀라 일어난 점, ② 피해자 및 목격자들(F, E)은 원심 법정에서, 피고인이 이 사건 당시 갑자기 일어나서 욕하더니 별다른 이유 없이 피해자를 먼저 때렸다는 취지로 진술하고 있으나, 피고인이 이 사건 직후 112에 전화를 걸어 피해자 일행의 절취 범행을 신고하였던 점, 피해자는 이 사건 목격자들인 F, E과 친구사이로서 그들과 수회 합동하여 절취범행을 한 범죄사실로 공소가 제기되어 특수절도죄로 처벌받은 전력이 있는 점, 피해자와 목격자들의...