A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

A. The court below rejected the credibility of the victim's statement based only on the statements of the defendant, G, and F without credibility and judged the victim not guilty of this part of the facts charged, although the victim's statement was consistent with the specific, consistent, and consistent evidence of other circumstances. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence sentenced by the court below (the suspended sentence (the suspended sentence: a fine of one million won) is too uneased and unfair.

2. Determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor ex officio, the facts charged of this case were examined as follows (the judgment used again). As stated in the facts charged of this case, the applicable legal provision applies to “the injury by special assault, injury, or property damage” as “the injury by special assault, injury, or property damage” under Articles 260(1), 366, 257(1), 284, 283(1), and 262 of the Criminal Act as “Articles 262, 261, 260(1), 257(1), and 366 of the Criminal Act” and “Article 266 of the Criminal Act is not subject to the judgment of the court below in that it modified the contents of the indictment to “the injury by violence, property damage, special intimidation, or assault and injury by violence,” and thus, it became no longer subject to the judgment of the court in this regard.

B. Even if the judgment of the court below on the assertion of mistake of fact (as to the part concerning the non-violation of fact), the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of fact is still subject to the judgment of this court within the scope of the modified facts charged and this is examined.

1) The lower court’s judgment held that the testimony of a witness at the present site of this case was clearly different from the statements of the victims, and that the witness F and G did not have a friendly relationship with the Defendant, but did not have a friendly relationship with the Defendant, although the witness F and G found the victims together with the Defendant.