All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

A. Although the Defendant intending to drive away from the victim D, she was in the air conditioners adjacent to the main body of the Defendant, the Defendant could not be able to her at the time of the victim D due to the Defendant’s rash, which is the driving day of the Defendant.

The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of this part of the charges that the defendant injured the victim's head and loss due to beer's disease, is erroneous in misconception of facts.

B. The prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court (three years of probation in one year and six months of imprisonment, and two hundred hours of community service order) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below regarding the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts are revealed: ① the victim D consistently stated that the Defendant her head was fluored with beer disease and was re-fluored by beer disease; ② the witness J, who was a witness, stated that the Defendant her head was fluord with beer disease and entered the beer disease; ③ the Defendant’s head was fluord with the CCTV immediately after the main point of this case was disputed with the victim D; ② the Defendant’s head was fluord with beer disease; ② the Defendant’s head was fluord with beer disease; ④ the Defendant’s head was fluord with beer disease; ④ the Defendant’s head was fluord with beer disease; and ④ the Defendant’s head was fluord with beer and fluord with the CCTV’s fluor, but it was difficult for the Defendant to fluort the CCTV.