The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In other words, the Defendant did not use violence against the victim.

Dor's act constitutes a justifiable act, and thus, illegality is excluded.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of KRW 300,000) is too unreasonable.

2 Ex officio Judgment

A. In a case where a court violating the principle of improperness recognizes the criminal facts that are included in the indictment within the scope consistent with the facts charged and where it is deemed that there is no concern about causing substantial disadvantage to the defendant's exercise of his/her right to defend defense in light of the progress of trial, the court may, even if the indictment is not modified, recognize the facts charged differently from the facts charged as stated in the indictment ex officio. However, in other cases, the court cannot admit other facts charged as stated in the indictment

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Do13567, Mar. 27, 2014). The lower court rendered a not-guilty verdict on the following (i) the facts charged, and subsequently pronounced guilty of the charges charged on the ground that the facts charged are in the relationship of a single crime.

(B) On September 12, 2016, the Defendant, as indicated in the judgment of the court below, abused the following: (i) around 15:30 on September 12, 2016, the Defendant, at the representative conference room of the occupants of the Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government B apartment management office, the victim C (n, 52 years of age) requested the meeting and the documents to report the apartment-related documents in his/her hand, but did not show that the Defendant used the documents in his/her hand to force the use of the documents.

The Defendant, as stated in the judgment of the court below, showed that around September 12, 2016, at the representative conference room of the occupants of the Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government B Apartment Management Office, the victim C (the victim, the 52 years old) was holding a meeting and presented the documents by reporting the apartment documents in his/her hand.