In addition, even if it is based on evidence other than the victim's statement, it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant inflicted an injury on the victim, as stated in the facts charged of this case.

Therefore, the court below erred by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations or by misunderstanding facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the instant facts charged was from around 00:50 on August 24, 2015 to around 01:20 on the same day, the Defendant: (a) had a high speech and behavior while dialogueing with her friend in front of D in Pyeongtaek-si C; and (b) the victim E, who had been under way, was misunderstanding that she would take a bath to her.

For this reason, the Defendant assaulted the victim's face by means of destroying it one time and over the floor, and suffered bodily injury, such as pelvise, cerebral finite, cerebral finite, and finites that require medical treatment for a period of 14 days.

B. The lower court’s determination is insufficient to recognize the facts charged on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor for the purpose of proving the facts charged of the instant case, as follows: (i) written opinions, the place of crime, the report of occurrence (b) and the report of internal investigation as they are written; or (iii) the document prepared by a judicial police officer based on the E’s statement was merely merely a document prepared by the judicial police officer; and (ii) the E

As long as the Defendant asserts, it is not sufficient to recognize the above facts charged unless there is a statement by E with the death diagnosis and the damage photograph. ③ On-site CCTV images and investigation reports (on-site CCTV investigation) are flown, and it is impossible to specify who the person appeared after being taken from a long distance.