Whether an act of attack committed with an intent to constitute self-defense after escaping from the act of attack

It is not inevitable in the defense of the victim's right against the infringement, but an attack from the objective of the theory after getting out of the infringement can not be regarded as self-defense.

Article 21 of the Criminal Act

Defendant

Defendant

Attorney Han-jin

Gwangju High Court Decision 84No591 delivered on November 22, 1985

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal by the defendant and his/her defense counsel are also examined.

If the evidence cited by the court of first instance as cited by the court below is reviewed by comparing the records, the court below's decision that recognized the criminal facts against the defendant is just, and there is no error of law of misconception of facts due to a mistake of facts against the rules of evidence, and self-defense refers to an act that he or she acquired in order to defend his or another person's rights against an urgent unlawful infringement, and according to the records, so-called the defendant's so-called "self-defense" refers to an attack from the victim's right defense, not from the victim's infringement, but from the object of the theory after the infringement.

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

Justices Kim Jong-sik (Presiding Justice)