The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In full view of the victim and H’s statement in the gist of the grounds for appeal, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles and misconception of facts against the defendant, even though the defendant could have publicly insultingly insulting the victim.

2. Determination

A. The judgment of the court below is based on the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, i.e., (1) the victim accused several statements of the defendant including the facts charged, and was prosecuted only for the facts charged in this case; (2) the victim appeared as a witness in this court and made a statement in the facts charged in this case as follows; (3) even according to the victim's statement, the defendant made the statement in this case as the victim and the victim's son and son; and (4) even according to the victim's statement, the defendant made the statement in this case as a mixed statement, and (3) the confirmation document signed by G on the apartment guard of this case stating that "the statement in this case was written" was stated in the "the police officer visited the apartment site of this case, and there was no doubt that the defendant and the victim did not know about what kind of the facts charged in this case at the time of separation and collection of wastes from the room of this case; and (4) the defendant did not have made the statement in this case to the investigative agency of this case.