The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Since misunderstanding the facts of the grounds for appeal or misunderstanding the legal principles first, B put the defendant into an empty space by using force first, it is only the case at which B head was made in order to escape from this site, so illegality is dismissed as it constitutes a legitimate defense or an emergency escape.

The punishment sentenced by the court below (the amount of 500,000 won) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

To recognize a certain act as a legitimate defense of the legal principles related to the assertion of mistake or misunderstanding of facts, the act must be reasonable as it is for the purpose of defending the current infringement of the protection of one's own or another's legal interests.

In addition, in cases where it is reasonable to view that the perpetrator's act constitutes an attack with the intent of attacking one another rather than with the aim of defending the victim's unfair attack, and the perpetrator's act was committed against it, it cannot be viewed as a legitimate defense because it has the nature of an attack at the same time as the defensive act (see Supreme Court Decisions 2000Do228, Mar. 28, 2000; 2003Do78, Mar. 26, 2004, etc.). Emergency escape under Article 22 (1) of the Criminal Act refers to an act with considerable reason to avoid the present danger to the victim's or other's legal interests. First, the escape act must be the only means to protect the legal interests of the victim, and second, the method to give the victim the most minor damage should be the one to the victim, and third, the benefit that the escape act must be protected by the court's entire law and order should be protected by the court's 200th judgment.