The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the judgment of the court below which did not recognize the defendant's assault is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts, even though the defendant got more than the complainant in light of the defendant's explanation of the complainant's elbow with the mobile phone.

2. Determination:

가. 공소사실의 요지 피고인은 2011. 8. 11. 16:00.경 남양주시 C 사무실 앞 노상에서, 고소인 D이 피고인 사무실에 있는 여직원에게 “측량기사들에게 물 좀 갖다 주라"고 하면서 피고인에게 "나를 보고 욕한 인간이 저기 앉아 있네"라고 욕설을 했다는 이유로 고소인을 향해 휴대폰을 집어 던지고, 피고인의 오른쪽 팔꿈치로 고소인의 명치 끝을 가격하여 고소인으로 하여금 현관 앞 땅바닥에 엉덩방아를 찧게 하였다.

B. The court below held that the complainant's statement in this court is different from the statement made at the time of the complaint or the police investigation in the behavior that D, E, and F's investigative agencies and this court made as evidence consistent with the facts charged of this case, and D's statement in this court is different from the statement made at the time of the complaint or the police investigation in the behavior that D's bodily part or elbbbow is the cell phone that the complainant's statement in this court met with the cell phone, and it is difficult to easily understand that the cell phone does not fall into the body of the witness and does not fall into the floor and does not fall short of 3 meters, while the complainant argued that he fell into the chest because he was diagnosed in this part, but there was no mention in the police as well as in the fact that he was diagnosed, and that it cannot be ruled out that the complainant's statement cannot be distorted at the time of the complaint and that the complainant's statement in this court was made next to E's cell phone name.