The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of legal principles) is reasonable to interpret that crimes such as simple assault and injury also constitute “crimes prescribed by this Act” under Article 7 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act. Therefore, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and thereby affecting the conclusion

2. The court below held that the term "this Act" in Article 7 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act means the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, and considering the purport of introducing the above provision, the ordinary meaning of the system of the provision of the Act and the text of the Act, and the circumstances leading to the amendment of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc., the term "crimes prescribed in this Act" in the above provision should be strictly interpreted as crimes directly requiring composition and punishment under the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act. Thus, it is difficult to view that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone does not constitute joint violence crimes under Article 2 (2) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, repeated crimes under Articles 2 (3) and 3 (4), organization of organizations, etc. under Article 4, use and support of organizations, etc. under Article 5, and deadly weapons or other dangerous articles that are likely to be jointly used for the duty of judicial police officers under Article 9.

The decision was determined.

Examining the above judgment of the court below in light of the relevant legal principles, the judgment is just, and there is no error of misconception of facts that affected the judgment.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is not accepted.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit.