A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for five years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

A. The defendant alleged a mistake of facts in the judgment of the court below is not guilty of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by mistake of facts, even if the defendant committed an assault against the victim, and did not have any assault against the victim. Even if the defendant committed an assault against the victim, there is no causation or predictability between the defendant's assault and the death of the victim.

B. Even if the Defendant’s charges of this case are acknowledged, the Defendant’s imprisonment (five years of imprisonment) declared by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) The degree of the formation of a conviction for finding a guilty in a criminal trial should not be deemed to have any reasonable doubt. However, this does not require the extent of excluding any possible doubt. The term “reasonable doubt” refers to a reasonable doubt with respect to the probability of a fact that cannot be compatible with the facts based on logical and empirical rules, rather than including any doubt and faith, and it cannot be deemed that a mere conceptual suspicion or abstract possibility is included in a rational doubt (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2004Do221, Jun. 25, 2004; 2004Do362, Apr. 15, 2005; 2010Do12728, Jan. 27, 2011; 2010Do12728, Apr. 15, 2005). Meanwhile, since the crime of assault is an aggravated result, it should be assumed that there is a strict causal relation between the act of causing a death and its consequences, etc.