The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The Defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment of innocence of this case is publicly notified.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding the facts) did not assault the victim as stated in the facts charged, but the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The facts charged and the judgment of the court below

A. On August 13, 2015, the Defendant of the instant facts charged: (a) around the studio of “D” D, operated by the Defendant located in Heung-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Cheongju-si, the victim E (the age of 55) was unable to have the wind of the Defendant and the Defendant’s husband; and (b) assaulted the victim with the head of the victim.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty on the instant facts charged by using as evidence a copy of each prosecutor’s interrogation protocol against the witness E, F, and G’s respective legal statements, E, F, and G as evidence.

3. The judgment of this Court

A. The burden of proving the facts constituting an offense prosecuted in a criminal trial is to be borne by a public prosecutor, and the conviction shall be based on the evidence of probative value, which makes the judge sure that the facts charged are true to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt. Thus, if there is no such evidence, even if there is a suspicion of guilt against the defendant, the interest of the defendant should be determined by the interests of the defendant (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Do1151, Jul. 22, 2010, etc.). (b) Taking into account the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the only evidence submitted by the public prosecutor alone proves that the defendant committed an assault against the victim as stated in the facts charged, to the extent that there

It is difficult to see it.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below convicting the charged facts of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment.

1) The Defendant.