B The appeal by the prosecutor and the prosecutor against the Defendants are all dismissed.

A. Defendant B 1) In fact, Defendant B’s instructions to delete the 3rd floor CCTV images of the instant hospital to management and employees G, and the employees in the computer room H remove the 3rd floor CCTV main body from the 5th floor ward, and make the said 3rd floor CCTV main body to be replaced with each other, and then remove the 3rd floor CCTV hard disks separately, and there is a fact that Defendant B was laid off in the front of the residence of the Defendant B. However, all of these measures were taken on July 10, 2017, and Defendant B did not have any intention to destroy evidence of unfair sentencing by misunderstanding the legal principles on the 10th anniversary of the death of Co-Defendant A (hereinafter “Co-Defendant B”). Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the 10th of July 11, 2017 or destroying evidence of unfair sentencing.

B. Prosecutor 1) In light of the misunderstanding of facts (Violation of the Welfare of Older Persons Act: Defendant A and Defendant medical corporation C) consistently stated that the victim I was assaulted by Defendant A, and considering the video and photographs of the victim, the statement and diagnosis of the doctor AD who diagnosed the victim directly, and the destruction of evidence by Co-Defendant B, etc., the fact that Defendant A abused the victim as described in the facts charged is sufficiently recognized. Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that acquitted Defendant A of the facts charged in the violation of the Welfare of Older Persons Act is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles (Intimidation: Defendant A) and the female elderly under 84 years of age with visual disorder.