The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Since a person causing misunderstanding of facts inflicted an injury on the victim in the course of setting up a dubbial bomb of the defendant, the defendant's act is legitimate defense.

B. The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (one million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

(a) Determination on the assertion of mistake of fact 1) An attack and a defense act has been committed annually between the persons who conduct a fighting match, and a defense act has the nature of both the attack and the defense act at the same time, and it is a legitimate act for a defense to be conducted by either party only by resorting to either party’s conduct.

It is common that it is difficult to regard it as a party's defense.

However, if one party unilaterally makes an illegal attack and the other party uses tangible force as a means of resistance to protect himself/herself from such attack and escape from this attack, unless it is evaluated as a new affirmative attack, it is reasonable to view that it is reasonable to allow under social concept and thus illegal (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 84Do1440, Sept. 11, 1984; 99Do3377, Oct. 12, 199). 2) The court below duly adopted and examined the following circumstances acknowledged by evidence, namely, the following circumstances acknowledged by the court below: (a) the defendant and the victim did not have good appraisal as a problem of double parking; (b) the defendant was found in the store operated by the damaged person on the day of the instant case that the defendant used the damaged part of the victim's body and the injured part of the victim's body in light of the fact that the defendant used the damaged part of the victim's body and the injured part of the victim's body.