The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Seized evidence No. 1 shall be confiscated.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-misunderstanding and misapprehension of the legal principles that the defendant used violence to victims by using a saw, but this is merely a legitimate defense or a legitimate act that does not violate the social rules, and there was no intention to inflict an injury.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, which erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant was physically and mentally weak at the time of the instant crime.

(c)

The punishment sentenced by the court below (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. In full view of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and legal principles, it is acknowledged that the defendant intentionally inflicted an injury on the victims who had taken delivery to Gyeongcheon-gun C at the time of the instant case without any particular reason, and it is difficult to recognize the fact that the victims had attacked the Defendant.

In light of the background leading up to the occurrence of the instant case, the form and degree of assault and injury, the relationship between the Defendant and the victims, etc., the Defendant’s act constitutes passive defensive act.

more than 100

It cannot be deemed that an active attack constitutes a political party’s defense, or that it constitutes a political party’s act with the reasonableness of means and methods and balance of legal interests, etc.

Therefore, the defendant's mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles are without merit.

B. The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s judgment as to the assertion of mental and physical disorder and the evidence duly examined and adopted by the first instance court, namely, the Defendant, from December 4, 1989 to March 1, 199, is the Dongsan-gu.