The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant’s self-defense had inflicted an injury upon the victim’s face at one time as stated in the facts charged. However, this constitutes self-defense as stipulated in Article 21 of the Criminal Act, since the victim and E were acts to defend the victim to unreasonably obstruct the Defendant’s performance of his/her press service.

B. Taking into account the circumstances leading up to the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant (the fine of KRW 1.5 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) In order to establish self-defense, the act of defense must be socially reasonable, taking into account all specific circumstances, such as the type, degree, method of infringement, and type and degree of legal interest to be infringed by the act of self-defense. The act of defense as a requisite for establishment of self-defense includes not only pure hydro-defense but also anti-defense form, including active anti-defense, but also the act of defense must have considerable reasons for defending one's own or another's legal interest (see Supreme Court Decision 92Do2540, Dec. 22, 1992). In light of the above legal principles, according to the records and arguments of this case, the victim and E conspired with the victim of this case, and the defendant for formal trial of this case, which was lawfully issued a fine of KRW 201,000,000,000,000 for whom the court below was declared and decided on June 28, 2012 (see Supreme Court Decision 92Do2540, Jun. 28, 201202).