The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

가. 특수 상해의 점( 원심 이유 무죄 부분 )에 대한 사실 오인 주장 원심은 피해자의 과거 사진에 의하더라도 코뼈가 휜 것으로 보인다는 이유로 코뼈가 휘었다는 피해자 주장의 신빙성이 없다고 판단하였으나, 공소장이 변경되어 피해자의 상해 부분이 비골 골절에서 안면 부 찰과상으로 특정되었으므로 피해자가 이 사건으로 비골 골절을 입었는지 여부는 판단대상이 아니다.

Nevertheless, the court below erred in misunderstanding the facts of injury after the amendment of the indictment, based on the victim's statement about the injury before the amendment of the indictment.

B. The lower court’s punishment (4 million won in penalty) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In relation to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts, the injury in the crime of misunderstanding refers to the injury of the victim’s physical integrity or the harm of biological function. As such, the degree of the injury is so minor that it can occur during daily life, so there is no need for separate treatment, and the injury thereby impairing the completeness of the body or making the state of health defective.

In a case where it is difficult to see it, the crime of injury is not established (see Supreme Court Decision 2002Do1150, Jul. 9, 2002). According to the records, the inspection of the victim's eye and the degree of natural recovery following the passage of the time is not any impediment in daily life even if the victim's eye are not treated, and even if it is not treated, it can be naturally cured. In addition, the victim did not receive treatment at a hospital, etc., and in fact, the victim has damaged the completeness of body due to such minor circumstance, has a disability in the life function or has changed the state of health.

It is difficult to see this as an injury.

Therefore, it is not guilty of special injury.