2. Each of the witness C and D’s legal statements is admitted as evidence that seems consistent with the facts charged in the instant case.

However, in this court, E, where the defendant and the victim had worked in the office, testified to the effect that "C had floated the defendant who was seated in the chair, and the defendant was able to get a dular in order not to go beyond the rear," and the victim is also recognized as having first floated the defendant who was seated.

또한 이 사건 당일 현장에 출동한 경찰관이 작성한 출동보고서에 의하면, 당시 피고인이 피해자에 대한 처벌을 강력하게 원하고 있었고, 피고인의 목부위에 반창고가 붙여져 있었던 반면, 피해자는 육안으로 확인되는 피해의 흔적이 없었으며, 피고인은 ‘엉겹결에 피해자의 멱살을 잡았다’, ‘멱살을 잡으려고 한 것이 아니다’라고 증인 E의 법정진술과 같은 취지의 주장을 하였다.

D, which written the above dispatch report, testified that “it may be expressed as flabing even in the case of a dubing on the breast side” in this court.

In full view of these circumstances, the possibility that the Defendant, who dumped from the victim with a seated, did not go beyond the rear cannot be ruled out, and it is difficult to evaluate the Defendant’s act as a assault, and it is also difficult to view that the Defendant had the intent of assault.

3. In conclusion, since the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, it shall be acquitted under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act and Article 58(2) of the Criminal Act.