Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The lower court found Defendant 1 guilty of false facts, although the Defendant had found the victim’s house at the time and told the victim to open a door, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine, even though there was no intimidation, such as “a kniff knife and fnife.”

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (an amount of two million won) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) The lower court acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged, although it found the Defendant guilty on this part of the facts charged, where the Defendant recognized the victim’s residence door-to-door, and comprehensively took account of the victim’s consistent statement or the victim’s photograph, etc.

2) The above sentence committed by the lower court against the Defendant is too uneased and unfair.

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake, the victim expressed consistently from the investigative agency to the court of the court of the court below to the effect that “the victim knife away from knife by knife, knife.”

A witness E, who has made a statement and is living in the victim's house, has expressed a sound fact at the time that he was "the defendant will throw away in a knife."

In full view of the fact that statements are consistent with the statements of the victim, this part of the facts charged is found guilty.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of facts is without merit.

B. 1) The lower court’s determination on the Prosecutor’s assertion of mistake as to the prosecutor’s facts was based on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor solely on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, as stated in its reasoning, that the Defendant damaged the above entrance.

It is difficult to conclude it, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, and not guilty of the above charges.

2) In addition to the circumstances cited by the lower court in its judgment, the crime of damaging property is another person.