The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal consistently states, from the investigation stage to the original trial, that “the defendant has taken his face by drinking, and again tried to take the face by drinking, and the defendant will take the face by his own care of his hand,” and the contents of the photograph and the written diagnosis of injury taken by the victim at the time conforms to the victim’s statement, and even if according to witness F’s statement, it can be recognized that the F would have a certain degree of time to the extent that the witness F would speak. However, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of the charges prior to the amendment of this case, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, by misunderstanding the facts.

2. The ex officio judgment prosecutor changed the facts charged against the defendant in the trial at the court below to " around 10:00 on June 20, 2012, the defendant applied for changes to the bill of amendment of indictment with the content that "the defendant applied for changes to the victim's face and the damaged part of the victim's face due to drinking in the middle-gu Seoul Central District Office, Seoul Central District Court's decision-making problems related to the victim D (the age of 46) and E Union, and applied for changes to the victim's face and the damaged part of the victim's face and the damaged part, which requires about 4 weeks medical treatment." Since this court permitted the changes to the subject of the judgment, the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained.

However, even if there are such reasons for ex officio destruction, the prosecutor's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court within the scope related to the changed facts charged.

3. Determination

A. At around 10:00 on June 20, 2012, the Defendant, as to the facts charged of the instant case, was able to look at the victim D (year 46) and E Association-related issues in the mid-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, on the face of the victim and the damaged part of the victim, making up for about 4 weeks of treatment to the victim. In addition, the Defendant was at the 5-day river bed to the right bottom of the 5-day river, and the 5-day river bed to the inside and outside of the inside.

B. The Defendant charged before the amendment.