The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant’s crime of this case by misapprehending the legal doctrine constitutes self-defense as it committed in order for the Defendant, who was lost in the length of living, to feel at risk of life and control the other party because he did not publish the Defendant’s literary work for 16 years or more, despite the repeated request.

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

2. Determination

A. In order for a certain act to be recognized as self-defense with regard to the assertion of legal principles, it must be reasonable to recognize the act as a defense for the current infringement of one’s own or another’s legal interest. Therefore, it is not recognized as legitimate self-defense against an unlawful infringement. Whether the act of defense is socially reasonable should be determined by taking into account all specific circumstances, such as the type, degree, method of infringement, and type and degree of legal interest to be infringed by the act of defense.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2003Do4735 Decided April 27, 2006, etc.)