The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the summary of the grounds for appeal (the fact-finding) by the victim's statement, etc., the court below acquitted the defendant, although the defendant was found to have inflicted an injury on the victim in collaboration with C. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

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

A. On November 3, 2011, at around 21:17, the summary of the facts charged in the instant case: (a) the victim E(32 years of age) was drinking at the 103 Do apartment parking lot of Seo-gu Daejeon, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Daejeon at once; (b) the number of back water of the victim was multiple times; and (c) the victim got off the left side of the victim.

As the victim occurred, the defendant got off the victim's left side buckbucks one time, followed the victim's buckbucks, and C took the victim's bucks one time, and C took the victim's bucks one time by drinking.

As a result, the Defendant, in collaboration with C, inflicted injury on the victim, such as non-furnites, climatics, and dume, which require medical treatment for about 28 days.

나. 원심의 판단 1 피고인이 C과 ‘공동하여’ 피해자에게 상해를 가하였는지에 관하여 원심은, 폭력행위 등 처벌에 관한 법률 제2조 제2항의 '2인 이상이 공동하여'라고 함은 그 수인간에 소위 공범관계가 존재하는 것을 요건으로 하고, 또 수인이 동일 장소에서 동일 기회에 상호 다른 자의 범행을 인식하고 이를 이용하여 범행을 한 경우임을 요한다고 하면서, ① 피해자는 경찰에서는 “피해자의 처와 경비원 등이 와서 싸움을 말릴 즈음 피해자가 피고인에게 ‘이리 오라’고 말하며 다가가 다시 멱살을 잡고 실갱이를 하는 중에 피고인이 왼쪽 발로 피해자의 왼쪽 허벅지를 차 피해자와 피해자의 처가 바닥에 넘어졌다”라고 진술하였고, 원심 법정에서는 "피해자가 여자를 잡았더니 그때 피고인이 오면서 피해자를 발로 찼다.

As such, vagabonds are used.