1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

가. 제37보병사단 C근무대에 근무하던 원고는 2010. 9. 25. 14:30경 청주시 상당구 D에 있는 E마트 내 실내 어린이 놀이터에서 자신의 딸(당시 4세)에게 접근하는 피고의 아들(당시 3세, 이하 ‘피해자’라 한다)을 왼손으로 밀어 위 피해자로 하여금 바닥에 넘어져 엉덩방아를 찧게 하였다.

B. The Defendant reported to the police to the effect that “the Plaintiff got her son’s son with the Defendant’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son

C. On October 14, 2011, the general military court at the 37th general military court rendered a judgment of not guilty on the part of the Defendant on the charge of the crime of assault and bodily injury on the ground that the victim’s external stress disorder, etc. cannot be deemed to have resulted from the Defendant’s assault. On the other hand, the court found that the crime of assault was committed and sentenced to a judgment of conviction of a fine of KRW 50,000 (the general military court at the 37th general military court)

The plaintiff and the military prosecutor appealed to the above judgment of the first instance court as the High Court for Armed Forces 2014No90, but the above appeal was all dismissed, and the plaintiff and the military prosecutor filed each appeal with the Supreme Court 2012Do1204.

On March 27, 2014, the Supreme Court judged that the plaintiff's act against the victim's his/her father's wife constitutes a legitimate act of defense in order to prevent the victim's sudden attack against his/her father's father's wife, and thus, reversed the conviction part of the appellate court and remanded it.

E. On July 15, 2014, the High Court for Armed Forces (No. 2014No90) after remanded the Supreme Court for Armed Forces.