The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In the instant case where the Defendant, as a misunderstanding of facts, has committed continuous and repeated assault against the victim C in the same company for a period of not less than two years, he/she relatively consistently rejected the credibility of the victim’s statements on the sole ground that the victim and his/her witness could not accurately memory the date, method, etc. of the assault, and thereby acquitted the Defendant of each assault listed in Nos. 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 9 of the attached Table of Crimes (1). The lower court erred by misapprehending the facts.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court against the Defendant (an amount of KRW 3 million) is too unhued and unfair.

2. Determination

A. (1) The summary of this part of the facts charged is the person who was the workplace of the victim C (20 years) and the victim was a substitute for military service in D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”).

person is a person.

On December 2, 2012, the Defendant: (a) committed assault against the victim by using the string, chain, and date dracker, which are dangerous things over six times in total, as described in the No. 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and 9 of the List of Crimes (1), from that time until September 2014, the Defendant: (b) committed an assault against the victim, without any justifiable reason, at least twice before the dracker of D’s camera, which is located in E, in the light of the following: (c) the string; (d) the string, string, and the string.

(2) The lower court found the Defendant not guilty of all the charges on the ground that there is no evidence to find the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, on the grounds that there is no credibility in the statements made by witnesses K in an inconsistent investigative agency, and there is no objective evidence to ensure the accuracy in the statements made by the victim in the investigative agency and the court of the lower court at the court.

(3) The following circumstances that can be known from the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, namely, the date, time, place, and method of assault by the Defendant at K investigative agency.