상해
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the victim D made a consistent statement to the effect that the defendant suffered injury as to the facts charged in this case by threatening the victim during a dispute between the defendant and the defendant. The victim's injury diagnosis also complies with the victim's statement, and the defendant also acknowledges the fact that the victim was punished for a conflict with the victim. Thus, the defendant's credibility of the victim's statement cannot be ruled out, and the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of the facts charged in this case, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, is erroneous.
2. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case was around 13:00 on April 2, 2011, the Defendant found the victim D (the victim D) at his own house located in Suwon-gu, Busan (the age of 76), and the Defendant considered the victim’s disuse to return the waste collected on the ground that the victim would bring about the abolition, and then the Defendant would return the waste. On the other hand, the Defendant laid down only the bags containing the victim’s disuse on the back of the victim’s head and back of the victim’s head when the Defendant’s house was taken to drink the Defendant’s house, and then, the victim got the victim’s chest to go beyond the gate.
As a result, the Defendant brought about the head and sprinkling of the victim in need of treatment for about two weeks.
3. The court below held that there is a witness witness D's legal statement, a written complaint for D's preparation, a police statement of D's police statement, and a written diagnosis of injury, among the evidence, it is only about the degree of injury suffered by D, and it cannot be a direct evidence for the defendant that the defendant caused such injury. ① There is no fact that the defendant consistently conducted a dispute at the investigative agency up to this court to the point of the abolition and collection related to the abolition and collection of D, but there is no assault about D. However, the court below found a plastic bag containing D's plastic bags which contains the abolition from D's own office and then re-consting it.