The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

1. Defendant A (ma, 73 years old) and the victim C (n, 72 years old) are neighboring people, and the house of the Defendant and the victim is in contact with one another’s inner wall.

At around 08:00 on June 24, 2016, the Defendant: (a) caused part of the wall in the form of ginging-type insertion using ging-type ging-type ging-type ging-type ging-type ging-type ging-type ging-type ging-type ging-type ging-type ging-type ging-type ging-type ging-type ging-type ging-type ging-related ging-

2. To recognize a certain act as a self-defense, the act is to defend against the current infringement of one’s own or another’s legal interest, and thus ought to be reasonable. Thus, the self-defense against an unlawful and lawful infringement is not recognized, and whether the act of defense 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 of infringement, the method of infringement, and the type and degree of the legal interest to be infringed by the act of defense.

(2) On June 20, 2016, the Defendant issued and confirmed a summary order of KRW 700,00 (Seoul Central District Court Decision 2016Da14924, Nov. 13, 2003, etc.). According to the records, C, around 10:0 on June 20, 201, on the ground that a part of the Defendant’s house infringed on the Defendant’s land boundary, and destroyed the Defendant’s house’s wall surface, and on June 22, 2016, on the ground that a part of the Defendant’s house intrudes on the Defendant’s land boundary, it was destroyed and damaged, and even around 15:20 on June 22, 2016, the Defendant’s ground that a summary order of KRW 700,000 (Seoul Central District Court Decision 2016Da14924, Jun. 24, 2016) was issued and confirmed.