The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of one million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles recognize the fact that the defendant inflicted an injury by pushing the victim over, the victim was able to take the view first of all, and the defendant was faced with the body of the victim in a timely manner to avoid this, so the defendant's act constitutes self-defense and thus constitutes excessive self-defense, and thus, even if the punishment can be mitigated or exempted, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case without recognizing self-defense or excessive self-defense, there is an error of law by misunderstanding of facts or by misunderstanding of legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. In consideration of the various circumstances of the Defendant’s unfair sentencing, the lower court’s punishment (two million won of fine) is too heavy.

2. Determination

A. In order for a certain act to be recognized as self-defense by mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles to constitute self-defense, it must be reasonable to defend the current infringement of one’s own or another’s legal interest. Thus, it is not recognized as legitimate self-defense against an unlawful infringement. Whether a defense act is socially reasonable should be determined by taking into account all specific circumstances, such as the type and degree of the legal interest infringed by the act, method of infringement, the completion of the act, and the type, degree, etc. of the legal interest infringed by the act of defense (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Do3606, Nov. 13, 2003). If a certain act was conducted to defend the infringement under the objective premise of the self-defense, which is the current unfair infringement of one’s own or another’s legal interest, but it constitutes excessive defense only where there is no reasonable ground.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2007Do1006 Decided February 14, 2008). In light of such legal doctrine, the Defendant’s act is against self-defense or excessive defense.