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. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles do not seem to have any scam of the victim, and even if a scam assault was committed, it constitutes self-defense or legitimate act.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (fine 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The court below rejected the defendant's assertion and convicted him of the facts charged in this case. According to the evidence duly adopted and investigated in the court below and the trial court, the judgment of the court below is just and there is no error of misunderstanding of facts or of misunderstanding of legal principles.

B. In light of the fact that the Defendant was not in good reputation and the Defendant’s statement of damage, the Defendant, at the time of the instant case, seems to have satisfly satddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd

Since such an act of assault by a defendant appears to be an act of attack beyond a defensive act, it cannot be evaluated as self-defense or legitimate act to avoid an attack by a victim.

However, examining the circumstances in which the instant assault occurred, since the victim has a large aspect of inducing the Defendant’s assault, and in light of the health status of the Defendant, it can be sufficiently understood that the Defendant has committed an excessive reaction, this should be taken into account in sentencing.

In full view of such sentencing circumstances and other circumstances as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, etc., the lower court’s sentence is somewhat unreasonable.

3. The judgment below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is reasonable.