The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of the facts) is that the defendant had the intention to assault the victim by the next door, in light of the fact that the defendant opened a door and made a high speech between the defendant and the victim before the opening of the door, and that the defendant stated that there was no contact between the victim and the victim's body part.

It is reasonable to view it.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is the Defendant is the instant vehicle driver and the victim D is the vehicle driver of the instant vehicle, and the Defendant and the victim were the vehicle driver of the instant vehicle, and they were parking problems within the parking lot for the first exhibition hall, Hanyang-ro, Hanyang-ro, Hanyang-ro, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu.

On February 27, 2015, from around 12:30 on the same day to around 12:35 on the same day, the Defendant: (a) took into consideration the following issues: (b) the victim was parked in front of the driver’s seat of the Defendant and the Defendant was parked in a parking zone for disabled persons; (c) the Defendant used the vehicle by opening the door of the Defendant’s driver’s seat to the victim so that it was chched, and assaulted by shocking the victim’s bridge and the part on the part of the victim’s bridge.

B. The judgment of the court below held that the court below stated to the effect that the victim of the marine accident "the victim of the marine accident, who opened the door and made it difficult to exclude the possibility that the defendant would have contacted with the victim who was close to the door without any specific assault with the victim during the vision," and that "the victim of the marine accident, who was suffering from half or half of the time of parking space due to the lack of sufficient time to attach parking space between the victims, has opened the door, and the defendant made a report to 112 even after the defendant made a report to 112, as he reported the vehicle in 112." The court below appears to have been prior to the big shock of mutual appraisal at the time of opening the vehicle door. The victim cannot find any reference related to the assault in the recording of the contents of conversation between the defendant and the victim (the investigation record No. 44 of the investigation record) after the victim of the case.