The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the legal principles’s assertion (the fact of injury by robbery) that the Defendant did not begin to assault the victim for the purpose of taking property, but the Defendant’s act may be deemed as an act of realizing the criminal intent of taking a single property in whole and in substance, in view of the fact that the victim’s resistance suppression status, the Defendant’s taking of the Defendant’s property is extremely closely close at time, and that the Defendant and B continued to assault the victim even after taking the Defendant’

Nevertheless, the lower court rendered a not-guilty verdict on the charge of injury by robbery against the Defendant. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the causal relationship between the assault of robbery and the taking of property.

B. The lower court’s sentence on the assertion of unfair sentencing (three years of the suspended sentence in one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unhutiled and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the record, the lower court determined that the Defendant and B’s assault was used as a means of taking property, solely based on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor.

In addition, it is insufficient to conclude that the Defendant acquired property using the victim’s anti-dumping state created by the above assault, and determined that there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

① The fact that the Defendant and B assaulted the victim was due to the urgency related to the progress of the vehicle in B, and the Defendant was unaware of the fact that he had the victim’s goods.

② At the time of the instant case, the victim stated in the investigative agency to the effect that: (a) the Defendant and B did not know about the fact that he had been missing and brought about by the Defendant; and (b) the Defendant and B did not have an intent to force the Defendant from the beginning to the point of view due to the foregoing urgency.

(3) The part concerning the establishment of robbery among the facts charged is the accused and the victim.