The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal (legal scenarios) is that even if the Defendant committed assault against the victim as stated in the facts charged, it occurred in the course of preventing the Defendant from committing assault against the victim’s daily act, and the Defendant’s act constitutes a legitimate act, and thus, illegality should be avoided.

2. The phrase “act which does not contravene social norms” under Article 20 of the Criminal Act refers to an act which can be accepted in light of the overall spirit of legal order or the social ethics or social norms surrounding it, and whether certain act is justified as a legitimate act that does not violate social norms, and thus, it should be determined individually by considering the motive or purpose of the act, the reasonableness of the means or method of the act, the balance between the legal interests of the third protected interests and infringed interests, the fourth urgency, and the fifth supplementary nature that there is no other means or method than the act.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2003Do4151 Decided April 27, 2006, etc.). According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the witness C’s statement at the trial court, the defendant pointed out that while driving a vehicle of the victim at the time of the instant case on behalf of the victim, the victim is waiting the vehicle of the victim, and then the victim stops the vehicle of the victim on behalf of the victim, and then the victim contests the victim on the face of the victim, etc. The defendant can be acknowledged. Examining the relation between the defendant and the victim, the situation at the time of the instant crime, the contents of the defendant’s act, and the degree of damage inflicted on the defendant, the defendant’s act cannot be deemed as satisfying the requirements such as the reasonableness, urgency, and supplement of the means and method as a justifiable act.