The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the consistent statement of the victim and objective data corresponding thereto, the defendant can sufficiently recognize the fact that he/she inflicted bodily injury on the victim as stated in the facts charged.

2. The burden of proof for the criminal facts prosecuted in a criminal trial for a judgment is to be borne by a public prosecutor, and the conviction of guilt is to be based on the evidence with probative value sufficient for a judge to have the conviction that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, the suspicion of guilt against the defendant is between the suspect and the defendant, even

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

In light of the records, a thorough examination of the evidence of this case submitted by the prosecutor is conducted on February 11, 2003. The court below's decision that acquitted the defendant of the facts charged of this case on the ground that it is difficult to prove that the defendant's act of inflicting bodily injury upon the victim's right arms after closing the cooling house and the door door, which the defendant was opened, was carried out to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt as to the fact that the defendant injured the victim's right arms, is just and it does not seem to have any error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts as pointed out by the prosecutor in the judgment of the court below.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

(However, the judgment below's second 12 statement " February 27, 2017" is clear that it is a clerical error in " February 25, 2017", and it is correct ex officio in accordance with Article 25 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.