Nevertheless, the court below rejected the defendant's crime of injury and found him guilty only for the crime of assault, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The burden of proving the facts charged in a criminal trial is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction is to be based on the evidence of probative value that makes the judge feel true beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, the defendant is suspected of guilty, even if there is no such evidence.

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do1151, Jul. 22, 2010). (B)

The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court of first instance, namely, ① the Defendant consistently made a statement from the investigative agency to the court of court below that there was no injury by assaulting D except that, ② D does not have any fact of being dispatched by a police officer at the investigative agency, or that there was no fact of smugglinging the Defendant despite the fact that there was an assaulting by a police officer at the investigative agency (the 21th page of the evidence record), ③ it is doubtful about the credibility of the statement (the 45th page of the evidence record), and ③ at the time of the first investigation by the investigative agency, D statements to the effect that “at the time of the first investigation, the Defendant was seriously sealed by the Defendant’s shoulder, and did not go beyond the book” (the 38th page of the evidence record), and ④ The fact inquiry by the members of the court of second instance submitted at the court of first instance.