The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 300,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. There is no misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles that the Defendant inflicted an injury on the victim.

Even if the defendant injured the victim, the defendant's act constitutes self-defense.

The lower court which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine or misapprehending the facts.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of 300,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Decision 1) Article 314 of the Criminal Procedure Act provides, “Where a person who needs to make a statement on a public trial date is unable to make a statement due to death, illness, foreign residence, unknown whereabouts, or any other similar cause, the relevant protocol and other documents may be admitted as evidence.” Here, “location unknown” refers to cases where the court commissioned the person who made the original statement to find his/her whereabouts as the witness was not served several times, but the person making the original statement was unable to know his/her whereabouts, such as leaving the place of residence or leaving his/her residence without his/her residence. If the court intends to recognize that the witness’s whereabouts is unknown or that he/she is unable to make a statement due to any other similar cause, it shall be difficult for the prosecutor to prove that the witness was unable to appear at the court even though he/she made possible and sufficiently efforts to make a statement on the court date (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 201Do501, Oct. 17, 2013; 2013Do136, etc.).