The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On August 7, 2013, around 19:00, the Defendant discovered the victim C (Y, 77 years old) who was not in good condition due to the division of ordinary houses, and collected the stones in and around the vicinity of the victim and caused the victim to go beyond the scope of the victim.

As a result, the Defendant inflicted an injury on the victim, such as an injury on one side of the external wound, which requires approximately 6 weeks of medical treatment.

2. The defendant and his defense counsel did not inflict any bodily injury upon the victim at the time of his/her assertion.

3. Determination

A. While the victim made a relatively consistent statement from an investigative agency to this court on the facts of the Defendant’s injury, the Defendant may reverse the Defendant’s statement on criminal conduct at the time, and there is doubt as to whether the Defendant did not inflict an injury on the victim as stated in the facts charged, such as false response as a result of the investigation on the detection of false words, etc.

However, in a criminal trial, the recognition of facts constituting a crime must be based on strict evidence with probative value, which leads a judge to have the degree of having no reasonable doubt. Thus, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof does not sufficiently reach the degree of sufficient conviction, it should be determined in the interests of the defendant even if there is suspicion of guilt, such as the defendant’s assertion or defense is contradictory or uncomfortable.

B. As evidence consistent with the facts charged in the instant case, the victim’s statement and the injury diagnosis letter are written.

From investigative agencies to this court, the following statements were made by victims:

1. Statement at the hospital: The defendant's oral dispute with the defendant, and the defendant's desire to move toward the warehouse of the agricultural cooperative, and the driver's license has been lost.

The defendant is what he is.