The lower court acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged on the ground that it could not be seen as the same level as the wife that could normally occur during the daily life even though there was no Defendant’s injury.

2. The lower court presented detailed grounds for determination, and subsequently, determined that the victim was suffering from a little of the pains on the right-hand part of the right-hand baby.

Even if it is extremely minor that there is no accident, it is difficult to view it as "injury" in the event that there is no need to treat the situation or inconvenience that may occur ordinarily in the daily life, and that there is no difficulty in naturally healing and daily life due to the lack of treatment. The evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone proves that the victim suffered injury in need of approximately two weeks of treatment due to the accident in the instant case without reasonable doubt.

It judged that it was insufficient to view it.

Although it is difficult to find the defendant guilty of the facts charged by relianceing only on the victim's assertion in a different situation between the defendant's side and the victim's assertion in the course of driving the vehicle.

Even if the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below is examined in detail in comparison with the reasoning of the court below's ruling, the court below's finding a not guilty of the facts charged is justified on the grounds as stated in its holding

The prosecutor’s assertion of factual mistake is difficult to accept.

3. The appeal by the prosecutor of the conclusion is without merit, and is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.