The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the statement made by the victim at the investigative agency and the court of the court below is reliable even if there are some differences in the contents in detail. Thus, according to the victim's statement, even though the defendant sufficiently recognized the victim's awareness of the assault once, the court below rejected the victim's statement and acquitted the defendant. Thus, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts against the rules of evidence.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged was that the Defendant, at around 00:30 on February 25, 2014, boarded the 222-month Light Village 214, the Defendant, on the ground that the victim was not in operation as a destination, was assaulted on the part of the victim at one time on the part of the cab operated by the victim C (58).

B. The judgment of the court below held that there is a statement in the court of the court below of C, which is the victim as evidence consistent with the facts charged of this case, and a statement and a statement prepared by the investigative agency, and that the above C's statement is not consistent with the time compared to the defendant, and it is difficult to understand that the defendant paid the taxi fee even in the process of action, such as the price of the victim, etc. as the above facts charged, and that there is credibility of the defendant's consistent change of the defendant's statement in the above C's court and investigative agency, which is the victim, merely caused the victim's knife to pay and pay the fee, and there is no other evidence to prove the facts charged of this case.

C. 1) The burden of proof of the facts charged in a criminal trial is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the recognition of the facts charged should be proved to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt (the Criminal Procedure Act).