If a mutual vision and fighting are conducted, whether the establishment of self-defense is recognized or not.

In the event of fighting between the defendant and the victim and the victim, the act of fighting is at the same time a defensive act against the other party, and at the same time an act of attack is constituted against the other party, and the act of the other party is not deemed as an act of defense only by the defendant.

Articles 21 and 257(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 2 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act

Supreme Court Decision 4293 Form 492 Delivered on September 21, 1960

Defendant

Defendant

Seoul Criminal Court Decision 83No5127 delivered on November 1, 1983

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the trial evidence of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court below, the facts constituting the crime against the defendant are recognized, and there is no error of misconception of facts or incomplete deliberation as pointed out by the theory of lawsuit, and in this case, where a fighting is conducted on the grounds that the defendant and the injured party are punished by mutual vision between the defendant and the injured party, such fighting act constitutes a defense act against the other party and constitutes an act of attack at the same time and constitutes an act of attack against the other party, and it cannot be prejudicial to the other party's act as an act of attack. Thus, it is just that the court below applied the crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act as to the facts constituting the defendant's crime

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Shin Jong-young (Presiding Justice)