The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The judgment of the court below which acquitted the victim E and witness F of the summary of the grounds for appeal on the ground that their statements are different in some circumstances or circumstances even though credibility exists, are erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. On July 1, 2013, at around 13:00 on July 1, 2013, the Defendant: (a) requested a victim E to enter into an agreement to avoid criminal punishment for insulting the Defendant at the D real estate office operated by the Defendant in Nam-gu, Nam-gu, Gwangju; (b) refused such agreement; and (c) subsequently, the Defendant made verbal abuse, such as “if she is difficult, she will die at the same feche; and (d) he/she is not a person; and (e) he/she is informed of the police feat to make a decision.”

B. The lower court determined as follows: (a) although there is a statement in E and F’s respective courts and investigative agencies as evidence consistent with the facts charged in the instant case and a complaint filed by E and F; (b) the statement made by E and F was ① the time when E became aware of the location of D real estate operated by the Defendant, and the process when E and F visited D real estate (E was known as the location of D real estate during the process of pursuing E’s head office from the court to April 1, 2013; and (c) the testimony was made on July 1, 2013 for the purpose of concluding an agreement with the Defendant, but the investigative agency testified that E and F were aware of the location of D real estate by viewing the Defendant during the process of signing the door at the time of his/her request on July 1, 2013; and (d) F became aware of the location of D real estate during the process of signing the door at the time of his/her operation in the court.