The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, misunderstanding the facts or misunderstanding the legal principles, merely sealed the victim’s face at the time of the instant case by hand, and did not have the victim’s face at the time of her application as stated in the facts charged, and the Defendant’s act constitutes a justifiable act due to a considerable act permissible in light of social norms.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (an amount of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the Defendant, as recorded in the facts charged, did not constitute a justifiable act, and thus, the Defendant’s allegation is without merit.

1) The victim stated in the police that “the Defendant pushed the Defendant at the time of the instant case, and her right bucked at one time.”

2) On September 7, 2019, immediately after the occurrence of the instant case, the victim visited the new fish belt at Kimhae-si on September 7, 2019, and filed a report on the same content as the facts charged, shall also support the credibility of the victim’s statement.

Also, it is confirmed that the victim's right just body has changed from the victim's right side in the photographs taken by the victim at the time of the above report.

3) In the Defendant India Investigation Agency, “The face of the wife was carried out in hand by hand.”

The wife took the face at one time.

그리고는 자신이 아내의 뺨을 1대 때렸더니 아내가 깜짝 놀라는 것 같았다” 고 진술하였다.

4) In light of the developments leading up to the Defendant’s assaulting of the victim and the content of the assault, the Defendant’s act does not constitute a justifiable act.

B. The fact that the case of the instant crime committed by the Defendant who assaults the Defendant’s wife against the wrongful assertion of sentencing is not somewhat weak, and that the victim did not receive a letter of suspicion is disadvantageous.

On the other hand, the defendant used it as a substitute for factual relations and reflects the wrongness.