The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below which convicted the defendant, even though the defendant's act did not go against the social norms, is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles, since the other party's desire was frightened first.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one million won by fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the misapprehension of legal principles

A. The "act which does not violate social rules" under Article 20 of the Criminal Code refers to the act which can be accepted in light of the overall spirit of legal order or the social ethics or social norms surrounding it. Whether a certain act is legitimate that does not violate social rules and the illegality of the act is excluded should be determined on an individual basis, based on specific circumstances, under the following conditions: (a) legitimacy of the motive or purpose of the act; (b) reasonableness of the means or method of the act; (c) balance between the interests of protection and infringement; (iv) balance between the interests of protection and infringement; and (v) supplementaryness that there is no other means or method other than the act.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Do2680 decided May 27, 2010, etc.). B.

Judgment

위 법리를 이 사건에 비추어 보건대, 원심이 적법하게 채택, 조사한 증거들에 의하면, 피고인이 술에 취한 상태에서 승강장 스크린도어를 발로 차 소란을 피우자 피해자인 역무원이 이를 제지하고 역사에서 나갈 것을 요청하였으나 이를 거부하여, 신고를 받고 경찰관들이 출동한 가운데에서, 피고인이 “씨발” 거리며 녹음을 한다고 한 사실, 피고인이 피해자에게 “당신은 법정 가서 만납시다. 나 딱 두 번 찼어, 발로 찬거 아는데, 깨졌어요 당신 그렇게 실실 쪼개지마” 등의 말을 하고, 또 “내 나이가 58이고 당신보다 두배는 더 살았어“라고...