beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error) did not take necessary measures to confirm whether the instant vehicle was damaged by the Defendant’s towing act, such as dismissing an application for a witness by the prosecutor for an employee who issued a written estimate, and sentenced the Defendant not guilty of the facts charged in this case.
Therefore, the judgment of the court below is erroneous.
2. Determination
A. On November 14, 2014, the Defendant: (a) around 14:00 on November 14, 2014, the Defendant: (b) did not leave the Victim D’s E-Colorpacker car (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) owned by the victim D, which was installed on the front of the Macheon-si; (c) had the towing articles towing the vehicle to the parking lot in the office of Socheon-si, Macheon-si, Songcheon-do, Songcheon-do, Songcheon-do; and (d) caused damage to the Defendant in the process that the sum of the repair costs, including the replacement costs for the replacement of the latter vehicle.
B. The lower court rendered a not-guilty verdict on the facts charged of this case on the ground that the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor alone is difficult to deem that the facts charged of this case were proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and that there is no other evidence to acknowledge this.
C. 1) In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor was destroyed by the Defendant’s towing act as indicated in the facts charged.
It is insufficient to recognize the fact, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. (A) The statement at D's investigative agency and court of the original instance is not a statement by the complainant that the vehicle was damaged in the towing process of the instant vehicle, but a statement by the complainant was merely a part of the complainant that the vehicle was damaged after towing is completed. The complainant appears to be merely a side of the complainant. The complainant in the original instance court is the towing activity of the Defendant.