The judgment below

The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

except that this judgment.

1. The reasons for the appeal are added after the lapse of the period for submitting the reasons for the appeal only to the extent of supplement in case of supplement of the reasons for the appeal specified in the reasons for appeal.

A. The Defendant, by misapprehending the legal principles, has broken the victim’s hand to escape from the breath after the victim A dumbling the Defendant’s breath, and the victim did not go out of the Defendant’s escape and did not have any choice but have a choice to escape the gas gun of this case. Thus, the Defendant’s act of releasing gas sprayers to the victim by shouldering the victim and shooting the gas gun constitutes legitimate defense.

Even if the defendant does not have a legitimate defense, the defendant is not recognized.

Even if the defendant's act constitutes "when the act of defense exceeds its degree" under Article 21 (2) of the Criminal Act, and the defendant committed an excessive defense act as above due to fear, bad faith, entertainment, or confusion at night or under other extraordinary circumstances at the time of the instant case, and therefore, the defendant cannot be punished pursuant to Article 21 (3) of the Criminal Act.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal, the public prosecutor applied for changes in the name of the crime against the defendant in the indictment of this case to "special injury", and "Article 3 (1) and Article 2 (1) 3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act" in the applicable law, "Article 258-2 (1) and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act" as "Article 258-2 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act," and since this court changed to the subject of the judgment by permitting this, the part of the judgment of the court below against the defendant cannot be maintained.

B. There is a ground for ex officio reversal on the judgment of misunderstanding of legal principles.