The judgment of the first instance shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six years.

One (No. 1) of the seized stick shall be confiscated.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of the instant crime of self-defense, the Defendant, which was out of fear and fear, left from the fear and fear, left the victim to defend himself/herself at the time of the instant crime, constitutes self-defense. Thus, this constitutes self-defense.

B. At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant was in a mental and physical state due to brain disease, such as dementia.

C. The sentence imposed by the first instance court of unfair sentencing (one-year imprisonment and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. In order to establish self-defense as to the assertion of self-defense under Article 21 of the Criminal Act, the act of defense must be socially reasonable, taking into account all specific circumstances, such as the type and degree of legal interests infringed by the act of infringement, method of infringement, and the type and degree of legal interests to be infringed by the act of defense, etc.

(2) According to the evidence duly adopted by the first instance court on April 26, 2007 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do1794, Apr. 26, 2007). The evidence duly adopted by the first instance court is as follows: (a) the Defendant, the spouse of the Defendant, was changed to do so to the victim for drinking drugs; (b) the victim, “ how much he was boomed, how much he was boomed,” sounded, and the Defendant was pushed the Defendant; (c) even though the Defendant was fright, the victim was boomed so that he was boomed, and the Defendant was boomed once again, resulting in the instant crime; (d) although the victim was pushed the Defendant, it cannot be deemed that there was an assault to the extent that the Defendant caused the death of the victim; and (d) the Defendant was a special threat or threat to the Defendant at the time of attack.