The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal is that injury to the victim C constitutes a justifiable act with a decoration for his/her child, and despite the absence of a knife in the process of threatening the victim E, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles and misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles.

2. Determination

A. Article 20 of the Criminal Act provides that "act which does not violate the social norms" as to the assertion of a justifiable act refers to an act that is acceptable in light of the overall spirit of legal order or social ethics or social norms surrounding it. Thus, in order for a certain act to constitute a justifiable act, it must meet the requirements such as legitimacy of the motive or purpose of the act, reasonableness of the means or method of the act, balance between the legal interests and the legal interests of the protection, urgency, and any other means or method than the act (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Do8530, Feb. 25, 2005). The following circumstances acknowledged by evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, the victim's face at his own will, and the victim's face was exposed to the victim's face, and the victim's act does not meet the requirements of the victim's treatment, i.e., impairment of the victim's face, face of the victim's face, i.e., the victim's 14-day balance.

B. The judgment on the part of the crime of intimidation was examined, and according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the police investigation conducted by the injured person on the day of the case to the court below's trial, and the defendant's divorce.

In other words, the defendant is "the dead person" and the kitchen knife is a kitchen.