beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal by the defendant and his defense counsel
A. misunderstanding the legal principles, the Defendant had been late in time with the victim E and did not take personnel care of the person who had extended the time, and the Defendant did not do so. Thus, the Defendant’s act is a legitimate act that does not go against the social norms, since the Defendant was only scambling the victim’s back to the house in order to give lessons to this.
Nevertheless, the lower court convicted the Defendant of the facts charged of the instant case, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
B. In light of the fact that the illegal defendant in sentencing is not in good health condition and is economically difficult, the lower court’s decision that sentenced a fine of KRW 100,000 is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The "act which does not violate the social rules" under Article 20 of the Criminal Act as to the assertion of misunderstanding legal principles 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 certain act is a legitimate act that does not violate the social norms and thus, it should be judged individually by considering and determining the illegality individually under specific circumstances. Thus, in order to recognize such legitimate act, the following requirements should be met: (i) legitimacy of the motive or purpose of the act; (ii) reasonableness of the means or method; (iii) the means or method of the act; (iv) balance between the benefits of protection and infringement; and (v) supplementaryness of the benefits of infringement; and (v) there is no other means or method other than the act (see Supreme Court Decision 2002Do5077, Dec. 26, 2002). The defendant asserted that the defendant's act is a justifiable act that does not go against the social rules as alleged in the grounds for appeal; and (iii) the court below rejected the defendant's assertion in this case.
The court below duly adopted and examined the evidence.