The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. In full view of the summary of the grounds for appeal, including the victim G (hereinafter “victim”), the victim’s wife K and L’s statement and the written diagnosis of injury, etc., the Defendant could fully recognize the fact that the Defendant inflicted bodily injury on the victim by making the victim’s head due to beer disease as shown in the facts charged in the instant case. However, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged in the instant case, and the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts against the rules of evidence, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Summary of the facts charged in this case and the judgment of the court below

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case was around 02:00 on May 22, 2011, the Defendant: (a) on the Eju shop located in Kimhae-si, Kim Jong-si, the victim (the victim (the age of 65) did not go to the death when the F, one’s own act, was taken out of the country by avoiding the disturbance; and (b) he saw, A, and H, that the victim did not go to the death; (c) followed the Defendant by cutting the ebbbbbbb, and flad the eb, and followed the Defendant’s head by the beer’s disease located there.

As a result, the defendant jointly with A and H, caused the cerebral celebs with two open situations requiring treatment for about 21 days to the victim.

B. The following circumstances acknowledged by the witness G, K’s each legal statement, and the police statement of L (L constitutes a time when the person is unable to make a statement due to death) in the lower court’s judgment, and the following circumstances recognized by the witness G, K’s each legal statement, and the police statement of L (L constitutes the time when the person is unable to make a statement due to death; in light of the circumstances in which this case occurred and the circumstances thereafter; and in light of the fact that contradictions are not discovered, it can be seen that the statement was made under particularly reliable circumstances, and thus, the admissibility of evidence is recognized in accordance with Article 314 of the Criminal Procedure Act, i.e., ① the victim has consistently made a statement that he/she was the head of the Defendant as a beer’