The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the mistake of facts, the first instance court held that there was no proof of a crime against the facts charged that the Defendant, with the Defendant’s hand, carried the part of the victim K’s neck at several times, carried the part of the victim K’s breath, and damaged the victim’s breath in excess of the part of the part of the asphalt and the part of the part of the 21-day medical treatment for about 21 days, and that there was no proof of a crime. However, the first instance court found the Defendant guilty only of the part of the victim’s breath with the Defendant’s hand, which caused the victim’s breath in the left side of the treatment days.

In this case, there is an error of misunderstanding of facts.

B. The sentence sentenced by the first instance court of unfair sentencing (three years of suspension of execution in one year and six months of imprisonment) is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the first instance court held that the CCTV installed near the site of this case: (a) the Defendant was taken in the form of carrying the victim’s breath by making the falth in one hand after putting the victim’s falth, and strongly pushing the victim’s balth with other hand, but it is difficult to clearly confirm whether the Defendant took the victim’s face and balth by drinking the victim’s balth; (b) the Defendant’s balthing up the victim’s bridge cannot be confirmed by the video alone; (c) the witness L made a statement in the court to the effect that the Defendant balth and falthing the victim’s balth with the victim and falthing the victim’s central part; and (c) the victim’s falthing of the Defendant’s chest by taking account of the circumstances leading up to fighting with the Defendant’s chest, and the victim’s attitude in the court of law, etc., when the victim’s body was lost.