The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the statements of the victim, witness H, and I in the summary of the grounds for appeal, the court below acquitted the Defendant on the part of the facts charged in this case by misunderstanding the facts, although it can be found that the Defendant inflicted an injury on the victim.

2. Around August 22, 2013, the Defendant: (a) around 21:50 on August 22, 2013, the summary of the facts charged was that the Defendant was parked in the front of the D cafeteria located in the Gu Office C, and the Victim F’s f’s bridge was cut off, and F lost the center of his body and carried the front glass door.

As a result, the defendant suffered injury to the victim F, such as the knife and the knife of the knife that require approximately 12 weeks of treatment.

3. The lower court’s judgment: (a) it is difficult to believe that the statements made at H and G’s court court’s investigation agency and I’s statements made at the victim F’s investigation agency and (b) in light of the victim F’s behavior at the time of the instant case and the degree of physical fighting in the victim F’s body at the time of the instant case, the mere fact that the Defendant was dissatisfied with F et al. can be inferred that the Defendant had the intent to inflict injury on F with the intent to inflict injury on F; and (b) at the time E was predicted to engage in the act of leaving F in favor of F as above.

Under the implied communication with E, it is insufficient to recognize that the F has realized the intent to inflict an injury on the F by using the above act of E, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. ③ In the event of the statement of other related persons, the Defendant cannot be held liable for the crime of injury, on the ground that it is judged that the Defendant cannot be held liable for the crime of injury, among the facts charged in the instant case.

4. Judgment of the court below

A. In a case where the appellate court recognizes that the grounds for appeal exist, it is possible to determine the credibility of the testimony only by the statement in the protocol without re-examination of the witness examined by the first instance court.