According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, although the defendant could be found to have inflicted bodily injury upon the victim E at the time of the instant case, the court below found the defendant not guilty of the facts charged in the instant case, by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

Judgment

The court below duly adopted and examined the following circumstances, i.e., (i) the victim stated in the court of the court below that "the victim reported to the police after putting himself/herself on several occasions during the process of the instant case with his/her head and her bomb, etc., corresponding to bomb, etc., from the defendant during several times," and stated that "the police officer dispatched to the site at the time of the instant case did not speak that he/she would have been bombed and bombed from the defendant." Even if the victim was in dispute with the wage issue at the time of the instant case, it is difficult to easily understand the police officer's failure to talk about the fact at all as above from the defendant until before the police officer was dispatched to the site at the time of the instant case, and (ii) the police officer also stated in the court of the court below that it was difficult to find the victim's oral statement or the fact inquiry that the victim did not have any other evidence to believe that he/she was assaulted from the defendant or was issued."

Therefore, the judgment of the court below to the same purport.