The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. According to evidence submitted by a mistake-finding prosecutor, the court below erred in the misapprehension of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Aggravated Violence, etc.) and the defendant's intention in violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective injury, a deadly weapon, etc.) and the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective injury, a deadly weapon

B. In light of the overall circumstances of the instant case’s unreasonable sentencing, the sentence imposed by the lower court (ten months of imprisonment and two years of suspended sentence) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. Of the facts charged in the instant case, the summary of the facts charged pertaining to the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective, deadly weapons, etc.) and the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. (a collective, deadly weapons, etc.) was committed. From August 12, 2012, the Defendant: (a) around 04:20, the Defendant: “On August 12, 2012, the Defendant: (b) 13-lanes in front of the D market located in Bupyeong-gu Incheon, Incheon, along two lanes; (c) 14-17-13-17-17-17-17-14-17-14-17-17-17-14-17-17-14-17-13-17-14-17-17-14-17-20 of the Defendant’s cab, a dangerous object.

B. As to this, the lower court, even though each of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone, is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant was plucking or plucking the above hand, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this. Rather, the witness E is going against the Defendant at the time, and G.