All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) In the misapprehension of the legal principles, there is no substantial disadvantage for the defendant to exercise his/her right of defense, and the court below decided to revoke the permission of modification of a bill of indictment and determined the assault. The judgment below is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

2) The lower court’s improper sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. The part of the charge of assault, which is the facts charged by the prosecutor in the summary order of this case, is the charge of rape injury, which is the charge of the prosecutor's application for modification of the indictment, but the court below decided to cancel the permission of modification of the indictment and judged on the charge of assault. Thus,

2. Determination

A. The prosecutor may, with the permission of the court within the scope of not impairing the identity of the facts charged, add, withdraw, or modify the facts charged or the applicable legal provisions thereof stated in the indictment with the permission of the court. The identity of the facts charged is maintained if the social facts, which form the basis of the facts charged, are the same in the basic point of view. In determining the identity of these basic facts, the defendant's act and social factual relations shall be based in mind, and normative elements shall also be taken into account (see Supreme Court Decisions 2008Do3656, Dec. 11, 2008; 2009Do9593, Jun. 24, 2010). In addition, in cases where there are illegal grounds for the decision of changes in the indictment due to reasons such as not recognizing the identity of the facts charged, the court which granted the permission may cancel it by itself (see Supreme Court Decision 201Do116, Mar. 27, 2001).