The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case, misunderstanding the fact that the defendant exercised the force against the victim C, but it was intended to prevent the victim's forced intrusion into the defendant's house and thus constitutes a legitimate defense, and thus, it erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (the penalty amount of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the fact that the victim photographs the inside of the Defendant and the house outside the Defendant’s house using handphones, and the fact that the Defendant used the same type of force as the facts charged to the victim in the process of closing the entrance door.

However, the victim tried to forcibly intrude into the defendant's house;

Even if there was no material to see, and even if it was intended to intrude into shots, the exercise of tangible force, such as the defendant's facts charged, was a considerable way to defend the peace of residence

Since the defendant's act cannot be seen as a legitimate defense under Article 21 of the Criminal Act, it cannot be viewed as a legitimate defense.

The defendant's assertion of mistake of the above facts is without merit.

B. It is recognized that the Defendant is aged, is in an economically difficult situation, and the victim also made an error of photographing the Defendant and the house inside without permission.

However, in full view of the fact that the Defendant has been punished for assault, damage, etc. in the past, the fact that his mistake has not been divided, the victim's damage has not been recovered, and other various conditions of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments of this case, such as character, conduct, environment, etc. of the Defendant, the sentence imposed by the court below is not heavy.

3. Accordingly, the Defendant’s appeal is groundless.