The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The judgment of the court below that acquitted the facts charged in this case on the ground that the summary of the grounds for appeal (Seoul Central District Court 2013No. 2013Da324) and the crime of destroying and damaging property in this case are not identical with basic facts and thus the res judicata effect of the final and conclusive judgment is not affected.

2. In the instant case, the Defendant’s act of causing injury to the victim’s face by using the victim’s floor at one time, thereby destroying the victim’s face while using the victim’s face. In the instant case, the crime of injury and the crime of causing property damage of this case for which a judgment became final and conclusive are related to ordinary concurrences. In the case of ordinary concurrences, the res judicata effect of a final and conclusive judgment as to one of the crimes is not limited to other crimes (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do10233, Feb. 23, 2007). Furthermore, it is reasonable to view that the two crimes are identical with the date, place, motive, method, and the victim’s basic facts.

Therefore, since res judicata of a final and conclusive judgment on the crime of bodily injury is also limited to the crime of causing property damage in this case, the facts charged in this case constitutes a final and conclusive judgment, and the court below that acquitted the above facts charged is justifiable, and the prosecutor's argument in the misapprehension

3. Accordingly, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.