beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds of appeal (legal scenarios) is that the Defendant was pushed down with a part of shotic losses in order to prevent the Defendant from harming the victim’s wing-out as well as his/her wing-out. Thus, the Defendant’s act is not unlawful as self-defense or legitimate act.
In addition, it is difficult to find out whether the hole was caused by the victim's chest at the time of the instant case or by the other circumstances.
2. Determination
A. Whether a certain act of the pertinent legal doctrine becomes a legitimate act or self-defense as a ground for the exclusion of illegality should be determined reasonably and reasonably depending on specific cases, and the legitimacy of another act cannot be determined by going beyond the national order.
To be recognized as a legitimate act, the legitimacy of the motive or purpose of the act, the reasonableness of the means or method of the act, the balance between the protected legal interests and the infringed legal interests, the fourth urgency, and the fifth supplementary requirement that there is no other means or method than the act.
In addition, in order to establish self-defense, the act of defense must be socially reasonable, taking into account all specific circumstances, such as the type, degree, method of infringement, the level of completion of the infringement, and the type and degree of the legal interest to be infringed by the defense act.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2007Do7096 Decided January 18, 2008, and Supreme Court Decision 2017Do15226 Decided December 27, 2018, etc.) B.
In the instant case, the Defendant asserted the same purport as the reasons for appeal, and the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion in detail, on the grounds that the judgment (it does not constitute self-defense or legitimate act, in light of the fact that it is difficult for the Defendant to exercise strong tangible power, the degree of injury inflicted by the Defendant recognized as a photograph, and the Defendant used tools.).