The defendant shall be innocent.

1. Around March 15, 2014, the summary of the facts charged is around 23:45, the Defendant: (a) around the street in Guro-gu Seoul, Guro-gu; (b) around 23:45 on March 15, 2014, a person who appears to be the Defendant’s day-to-day walked the cab driven by the victim D; and (c) escaped; and (d) flicked the victim’s breath with the Defendant’s flick with his hand to escape; and (d) flicked five times his hand.

2. The Defendant consistently and consistently from the police to this court, and there was a fact that the Defendant flabeds and flabs of the victim, but asserts that it was self-defense that the Defendant was self-defense during the process of flabing the victim’s flab by putting the victim’s flab, even though flabs did not go on by the victim’s taxi.

Therefore, the victim Do, and the victim D argued that the defendant's daily conduct was flick on the victim's vehicle in the investigative agency, but this court reversed the statement to the effect that the defendant was clearly viewed through the studio of the victim's vehicle in this court. However, the victim did not reasonably explain the reason why the victim reversed the statement as above, and even if the witness was in the future when driving on the vehicle, it is very unusual that the defendant appeared to have been flick on the witness's vehicle even if the witness was anticipated in the future, it is difficult to believe the statements in the victim D investigative agency and this court, and there is no other evidence to prove that the defendant or the defendant's daily conduct was flick on the victim's vehicle.

On the other hand, in order to establish self-defense under Article 21 of the Criminal Act, defense acts are socially reasonable, taking into account all specific circumstances, such as the type, degree, and method of infringement of the legal interest infringed by the act of infringement, and the type and degree of the legal interest to be infringed by the act of defense.