The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, such as the victim's statement, witness F's statement, CCTV image, etc., the court below acquitted the defendant of this part of the facts charged, which is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (fine 1,00,000) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court found that the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated, namely, CCTV was installed inside and outside of the studio in the instant case, but the inside CCTV was not operated, and the inside CCTV was not directly inferred from the entrance of the instant case. According to the internal CCTV image, it was confirmed that the Defendant had committed an act of emitting the passage of the F’s body width, which prevents the Defendant from driving, and that the Defendant’s hand and scam contacted the victim’s body.

In light of the fact that it cannot be confirmed that the victim reached the distance of string or that it reached the point (or at the time when the victim deviate from studio in light of the distance of time between the above studio and the time between the above studio of the victim, it seems that the body of the victim at the time of the instant case was not at the distance of contact with the defendant's hand.) At the time of the instant case, E, who was directly assaulted by the defendant at the time of the instant case, stated that the defendant did not see the face of the victim's bucket with the investigative agency at the time of telephone with the defendant. G as a customer at the time of the instant case also stated with the investigative agency that there was no fact that the defendant committed a buck with the victim at the time of telephone conversation with the victim. The victim stated to the effect that the victim had consistently committed an assault by the defendant on the