The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of all the evidence, including the statement of the victim of mistake of facts, the court below acquitted the defendant on the crime of injury even though the defendant had an intentional injury. The court below erred in the misunderstanding of facts.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (the amount of KRW 500,000 of a fine) is too unjustifiable and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. On March 2, 2014, around 22:40 on March 2, 2014, the Defendant found the Defendant guilty of the charge of the crime of injury on the ground that the evidence submitted by a prosecutor alone cannot be readily concluded that the Defendant had the intention of injury, and that there was no other evidence to acknowledge it. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the charge of the crime of injury on the ground that: (a) the Defendant was not guilty of the charge of the crime of injury on the ground that it is difficult to conclude that the Defendant had the intention of injury solely on the basis of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor that there was no evidence to acknowledge it.

3. The following facts found by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, namely, ① the defendant and the victim were living in the next house of the same floor. At the time of the instant case, the victim was placed in the front door of the defendant in order to resist the noise generation problem, and the defendant went out of the door. ② After the instant case, the defendant and the victim were in conflict with each other due to noise generation, and the defendant was faced with the body of the victim by accident. ③ The victim was suffering from the bicycle installed adjacent to his house, and the degree and method of exercising the physical force of the defendant, and the process of suffering the victim's injury.