The case holding that an inevitable act of violence by passive resistance does not violate social rules

In light of the process, purpose, means, and the defendant's intent, etc., the act of violence is an act of lacking illegality that is acceptable by social norms, in light of various circumstances such as the process and purpose leading up to the act of violence, if the defendant was forced to kill the defendant's neck, and the defendant was pushed into the defendant's neck in his own house, and the defendant was pushed into the defendant's neck in his own house, by asserting that the defendant's house was owned by the defendant's house living alone, and closing the entrance and the defense door, and combining his family members, leading the defendant's hair into the defendant's house, and leading the defendant's neck into the defendant's house in spite of the sloping sloping and sloping sloping, etc., the act of violence is an act of violating social norms.

Articles 20 and 260 of the Criminal Act

Defendant

Prosecutor

Busan District Court Decision 83No47 delivered on April 2, 1983

The appeal is dismissed.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

An act in violation of the social norms stipulated in Article 20 of the Criminal Act is reasonable for a reasonable purpose not contrary to the sound will of the general public, and its illegality is excluded and not punishable. In this regard, the court below held that in the event of assault by the defendant, such as cutting down the entrance and door door and the change door, and cutting down the electrical line coming into the defendant's house, by combining his family members, the defendant's head knife and knife the defendant's head knife and knife the defendant's head knife and knife the defendant's head knife in his house in spite of his knife, the defendant's knife and knife's knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife, and the defendant's act of assault by the defendant was justified in light of the rules of evidence and its purpose and purpose.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Lee Il-young (Presiding Justice)