The judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the primary facts charged, it is recognized that the Defendant, around 22:00 on June 11, 2012, 823-10, Maok-dong, Masan-dong, Masan-si, Masan-dong, had a car driving on the road in order to park on the road. The Defendant’s vehicle was transferred to the hospital on the rear side of the vehicle and received an insurance company’s traffic accident, and D suffered an injury to D’s pressure that requires approximately 12 weeks of treatment.

Furthermore, I will examine whether D suffers the above injury by shocking D with the back of the vehicle that the defendant left behind.

D In the court of the court below, the defendant's vehicle was left behind, and stated that the part of the right jum and jum with the back was exceeded.

However, D stated at the police that “I are in the hospital to see the spirit, and how the accident occurred (Evidence No. 5, 12 pages, June 19, 2012)” and “I do not memory (Evidence No. 36 pages, July 10, 2012).” In the course of an interview with the prosecutor before the time of the detection of the false statement, I do not know whether the investigator in charge was involved in the accident. However, I stated to the effect that I would have caused the accident by deeming the Defendant to have taken measures to send back and received the accident to the insurance company (Evidence No. 57, July 11, 2012 of the Evidence Records).

Furthermore, according to the records, such as the medical records of J Hospital and the Health Insurance Corporation, D was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant case, and D was salted and tension before the instant case.