폭행등
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The court below's scope of the trial for the trial at the court below dismissed the public prosecution as to assault against the defendant among the facts charged, and sentenced the remainder of the facts charged. The prosecutor appealed only for the portion not guilty, and the dismissal of the public prosecution is finalized as it is because it did not appeal the portion not dismiss the public prosecution. Thus,
2. In light of the summary of the grounds of appeal (the fact-finding) in relation to each of the facts charged in the instant case, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles, even though all of the facts charged are found guilty, in light of the victim’s specific and consistent statement, witness’s statement, and written diagnosis of injury.
3. Determination
A. On March 4, 2017, the lower court determined that the lower court acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged on the ground that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone alone was insufficient to acknowledge that the Defendant was a witness of this part of the charges on the following grounds: (i) the witness G appeared in the court of first instance after the Defendant and the victim appeared in the singing room; (ii) there was no dispute over the degree of injury to the victim; (iii) the police officer called out at the time stated the content of treatment with the family members, such as the person under influence of alcohol (the Defendant) on the 112 reported case, including the fact that the victim was present at the singing room; (iv) the Defendant did not assault the victim; (iii) there was no fact that the victim was injured by the victim; and (iv) there was no injury on the part of the Defendant as the witness. < Amended by Act No. 2717, Dec. 27, 2017>