The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-finding is that the Defendant: (a) had the victim Party A prevented him from approaching his port; (b) did not commit an injury by assaulting the victim by driving the victim’s boat on the part of the victim; and (c) the Defendant did not commit an act of assaulting the victim Party C.

B. misunderstanding of legal principles, the Defendant’s act constitutes a legitimate defense or a legitimate act, i.e., taking the victim’s left side to keep the victim’s attack, or taking the victim’s body with one another and taking the victim’s body to keep the victim’s attack.

(c)

The punishment of the court below (700,000 won) which is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court also argued that the Defendant did not assault the victim, and that the Defendant’s act constitutes a legitimate defense, and the lower court sufficiently acknowledged the fact that the Defendant inflicted bodily injury on the victim by driving the vessel of the victim as stated in the facts charged, such as the instant case, and that the Defendant’s act at least the defense is an attack against the victim, and at the same time, an attack against the victim.

Since the defendant's act does not constitute a legitimate defense.

The court below rejected the above assertion. In light of the evidence duly adopted and investigated, the judgment of the court below is justified.

B. Whether the defendant's act constitutes a justifiable act

In order to eliminate illegality as a legitimate act, requirements such as legitimacy of the motive or purpose of the act, reasonableness of the means or method of the act, balance between the protected interests and infringed interests, urgency, and supplement to the absence of any other means or method (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 84Do39, May 2, 1984). It is recognized by evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below.