The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 300,000 won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant even though the victim suffered injury by mistake of the facts as to injury and exercise of the defendant's tangible power, was erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to injury, or due to the violation of the rules of evidence or the failure of trial.

B. The lower court, which acquitted the Defendant without recognizing the crime of assault, which is a reduced fact, is unlawful, since it is obvious that the Defendant used the victim as a assault even if the victim’s bodily injury was not caused by the exercise of the Defendant’s tangible force.

2. Determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor ex officio, the prosecutor shall retain the facts charged of the injury in the first instance trial as the primary facts charged and applied in the name of the offense, “Assault”, “Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act”, and “the ancillary facts charged” under the facts charged, and the judgment of the court below may no longer be maintained due to the addition of those subject to the judgment by this court.

However, the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court.

[Preliminary facts charged] On December 15, 2014, the Defendant: (a) around the entrance of “E” operated by the victim D (47 taxes) located in C at Won-si on December 13:5, 2014, the Defendant: (b) opened the above entrance; (c) obstructed the victim’s parts, such as the victim’s hand; and (d) prevented the victim from entering the said entrance; (c) obstructed the victim’s arms by hand; (d) moved from the back to the side of the victim; and (e) committed assault against the victim, such as pressinging the victim’s chest part on the part of the victim.

B. The lower court’s judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine on injury is legitimate.