The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant: (a) while the taxi fee paid by the victim was insufficient, the victimized person was boomed to the Defendant and tried not to have assaulted the victim’s chest to the victim, and did not assault the victim’s neck; (b) the Defendant’s act is a passive defensive act that does not go against the social norms, and thus, is not unlawful.

2. In full view of the following facts and circumstances revealed through the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant can sufficiently recognize the facts of assaulting the victim, and such an act does not constitute a justifiable act.

① The Defendant itself recognizes that he/she exercised a tangible force directly from investigative agencies to the trial of the victim’s chest.

② A victim reported to the police that he was assaulted and that the Defendant left the scene immediately after the Defendant left the scene (the time when the Defendant returned to and boarded from a taxi according to the victim on May 5, 2019, and 22:2:23:52 on May 5, 2019, and the victim reported to 112 on May 22:24:28 of the same day (the page No. 26, 58 of the evidence record) on May 5, 2019).

There is no conflict between objective evidence and victim's statement.

(4) On the other hand, with respect to the reasons why the defendant gets off from a taxi according to the victim, the defendant takes 7,000 won out of 7,400 won in the investigative agency and the court below (the victim's statement also corresponds to the victim's statement) to take the bath and take the bath.