The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the application for compensation is dismissed.

Defendant 300,000 won.

1. According to the consistent statement of the victim, witness G, H’s statement, and injury diagnosis report, the defendant can be found to have inflicted an injury on the victim’s left part, but the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

2. The following circumstances recognized by each evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the trial court. ① The victim consistently stated from the investigative agency to the trial court that “the victim sought to use a document used by the victim in his/her hand and there was a little vagabonds in the process of trying to do so, and the defendant cut off the part of the victim’s left hand and taken the documents by cutting off the documents.” ② The witness G also stated that there was a vagach between the defendant and the victim. Ha who is another witness also stated that the victim was flick and sealed with each other, while the defendant was not flick between the two persons, the victim did not have been flick between the two persons, the victim was subject to treatment at the time of the occurrence of the instant case, and the victim did not have to have been issued a photograph of the victim’s body on May 27, 2012.”