The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error) rejected the credibility of the statements made by E and his/her ancillary F, consistent with the facts charged in the instant case, and the lower court acquitted the facts charged in the instant case, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. On June 23, 2012, the Defendant: (a) around 19:30 on June 23, 2012, the summary of the facts charged was that E (47 years of age) was carrying her son F on a passenger car; and (b) the Defendant, who was engaged in traffic adjustment by mixing the above D hotel with the above D hotel, prevented the Defendant from driving his car; (c) on the ground that E was able to walk up, “I will dle the vehicle running,” and the Defendant was able to take a bath for the Defendant, and the Defendant was able to take her hand, and she was able to look at the e-mail with the Defendant’s hand, and the G who was engaged in traffic adjustment together with the Defendant, and she was able to assault the above employee H with assault and assault the above employee H, thereby bringing the Defendant into the e-mail’s 1st floor to the hotel of the above e-mail.

As a result, the Defendant, together with G and H, inflicted injury on E, such as crypum dump, which requires approximately three weeks of treatment.

B. The lower court stated that ① A was subject to the first investigation by an investigative agency, and the Defendant was the head of the Si/Gun/Gu, but at the time of G’s Da and E and returned to G, the Defendant stated that G was at the right side of the shoulder of E, and that G was at the time when he was fright, shoulder, and chest, etc., and that G was at the time of the Defendant’s timber, shoulder, and chest, etc., but the Prosecutor stated that G was at the time when he was pushed with the Defendant, and that he was at the time when he was at the time of the Defendant’s back, and that the Defendant was at the time when he was at the time of the occurrence of the instant case. In this court, the Defendant stated that G was at the time when he was at the time of the occurrence of the instant case, and that there was no memory in how he was any part of the case.