The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Of the facts charged against the Defendant, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty on the grounds of the judgment that the part of the facts charged against the Defendant causing bodily injury, such as salvous salt, etc., and sentenced the Defendant to a fine of KRW 300,000,00,000, by recognizing the Defendant guilty of the remainder of the facts charged in relation to the crime, and sentenced the Defendant to a fine, which only the Defendant appealed against the guilty part, and the prosecutor did not appeal. As such, the scope of this court’s judgment is limited to the guilty part of the lower judgment, and the remainder of the reasons for not guilty was excluded from the

2. The summary of the grounds for appeal (a factual error) did not assault the victim as described in the facts charged of this case.

3. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, it is acknowledged that the defendant and the victim were boomed due to the vehicle movement problems, such as cutting the defendant's house and cutting the defendant, and the defendant committed assault against the victim as stated in the facts charged of this case (On the other hand, even if the defendant's allegation in the grounds of appeal is made by legitimate act or self-defense as stated in the argument of the court below, considering the circumstances and circumstances leading to the crime of this case as discussed in light of the witness examination results and the record, the method and degree of the defendant's exercise of tangible power, and the situation of the victim after the exercise of the defendant's tangible power, it cannot be deemed as a simple passive resistance, which constitutes a legitimate act which is reasonable under generally accepted by social norms, or a self-defense which is socially reasonable to defend against unfair infringement (see Supreme Court Decisions 2003Do300, Sep. 26, 2003; 196.)