The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the summary of the grounds for appeal, the victim's legal statement and CCTV image, etc.: (a) the defendant prices the victim's face as shown in the facts charged; and (b) the victim sufficiently recognized the fact that the victim suffered bodily injury, such as fingers, etc. in the process of preventing such act; (c) however, the court below recognized only the crime of assault, which is the fact of reduction, and acquitted the victim of the injury; and (d) the court below erred

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant is a person who works as B employee, and the victim C is a person who works as the same female-friendly Gu and is not aware of each other.

At around 03:00 on November 27, 2017, the Defendant: (a) inflicted injury on the victim, on the road located in Ulsannam-gu, U.S., on the part of the E station located in U.S., on the ground that the former part of the conversations with the Defendant about the inconvenience in drinking-in atmosphere, the Defendant was changed to prevent the Defendant from satising and destroying the Defendant’s horse, on the ground that the latter part of the conversations with the Defendant, on the part of his hand, once against the victim’s left side, and twice twice the victim’s face was taken by drinking-in, etc. for 14 days.

B. The judgment of the court below is that the victim, who was exposed to CCTV taken at the time of the instant case, was first exposed to the victim's face, but the victim was faced with the victim's face, but the victim was not faced with the victim's face, and later, the defendant was exposed to the victim's face while he was faced with the victim's face without proper centering, and then the defendant was exposed to the victim's face, but it seems that the victim was faced with the victim's face, and the victim was forced by the investigation agency to take two times as drinking, and the victim was stated by the victim at the time of the instant case.