The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

However, the period of three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In relation to Article 1 of the facts charged by the misunderstanding of legal principles, the victim used violence by harming E, etc., and the defendant first attempted to restrain the victim by using sparing the victim, etc., but, in order to defend the current infringement of E’s body, the victim was unable to cope with the loss of the victim’s body under the influence of alcohol, so it constitutes legitimate defense. In relation to Article 2 of the facts charged, the defendant was in a state of lacking ability to distinguish things or make decisions under the influence of alcohol at the time.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio, prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the court below, the prosecutor applied Article 258-2(1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act to “special injury” among the names of the crimes committed by the prosecutor. However, since Article 1(2) of the Criminal Act provides that “when punishment is less than that of the former Act, due to the revision of the Act after the crime,” the above provision must be punished (Supreme Court Decision 2015Do17907 Decided January 28, 2016), and Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act was amended to “the subject of the judgment by the court,” and this provision and the remaining criminal facts were related to concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, the judgment of the court below that should no longer be pronounced.

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding the facts and legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined in the following 3.3.

3. Judgment on the misapprehension of legal principles

A. The type, degree, and degree of the legal interest infringed by the infringing act in order to establish a legitimate defense of a political party’s defense assertion.