The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. 1. Fact-misunderstanding 1. The defendant's injury when the victim E constitutes a direct defense due to an act in the course of keeping the family from the crime of household destruction.

2) The Defendant did not demand money by threatening the victim to commit an attempted crime.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (2 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. In order to establish a legitimate defense under Article 21 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Korea, the act of defense must be socially reasonable, taking into account all specific circumstances, such as the type and degree of the legal interest infringed by the act of infringement, the method of infringement, the level of completion of the act of infringement, and the type and degree of the legal interest to be infringed by the act of defense.

Although the injured was the purpose of resisting and preventing the defendant's wife and misconduct, the injured was to prohibit it.

Even if the defendant uses violence against the victim as stated in the judgment below, it is recognized that the defendant's act of assaulting the victim exceeded the reasonable scope in its means.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion that each act of the defendant who inflicted an injury on the victim is not illegal as a legitimate defense is without merit.

B. A summary of the facts charged is as follows: (a) The Defendant, on August 27, 2014, at around 19:00 on August 27, 2014, from the main point of “H located in Seo-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, the Defendant did not inform the Defendant of the fact of communication to the company’s members.

“Accomageing,” and demanding 50,000 won to the victim of the frighten, but failed to receive such demand.

B) On August 29, 2014, the Defendant, at around 10:00 on August 29, 2014, is aware of the fact that the Defendant was unable to attend a bank without giving money to the victim and that it was sent to the employees of the workplace and the parents.

“Pasting cage,” and 50,000 won was demanded to the victim, but failed to receive such demand.

2) The lower court’s judgment, based on the evidence as indicated in its judgment, shall be deemed as follows.