The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In full view of the Defendant’s new photograph of the gist of the grounds for appeal, the victim’s face photograph, the written appraisal by the National Institute of Scientific Investigation and Research, and CCTV images near the site, the Defendant may recognize the fact that he/she has inflicted an injury on the victim’s face, such as as written in the facts charged.

However, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant.

2. Determination

A. On June 19, 2017, from around 20:05 to 20:13 on the same day, the Defendant argued with the victim D as a matter of sea on the street in front of the daneaeung-gun, Jeonnam-gun, and raised the victim’s face to the left side of the victim, and led the victim to an unsatisfy in the number of days of treatment.

B. In full view of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, the lower court determined that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to have a reasonable doubt as to the facts charged of this case to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt as to the facts charged of this case.

1) The CCTV images submitted by the prosecutor alone cannot be confirmed to the effect that the Defendant committed a harmful act, such as the entries in the facts charged, within the crime period, and there is an unspecific aspect as to whether the harmful act, such as the instant facts charged, refers to the Defendant’s act at a certain place, during the crime period indicated in CCTV images. 2) At the site of the instant case, E, which was accompanied by the Defendant and the victim, stated consistently to the effect that the Defendant did not memory that the Defendant committed a harmful act, such as the entry in the instant facts charged, to the victim.

3. Regarding the statement of legal safety appraisal, the harmful act of this case against the victim was within the time of the crime of this case.