The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

The acquittal portion

1. On May 30, 2015, the Defendant: (a) was at the house of E-dong-gu D located in Daejeon-gu Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu, about 11:00 on May 30, 201, with D’s leakage or interest equilibrium.

E reported that he is together with the victim F (son, 39 years of age) and sent the victim's face by drinking in a water, walking her mar in a number of times, her mar, which is a dangerous object in front of the gate, and she laid off cement flar (ma 50cm wide, 30cm long) with the victim's left hand and laid down the victim's hand in a quantity, thereby cutting off the 5-day left part of the water tank, which requires about 5 weeks medical treatment.

2. Determination

A. The recognition of facts constituting an offense in a criminal trial ought to be based on strict evidence with probative value, which makes a judge not to have any reasonable doubt. Thus, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof does not sufficiently reach the extent that such convictions may lead to such convictions, the determination ought to be made in the interests of the defendant even if suspicions of guilts such as the defendant’s assertion or defense are contradictory or uncomfortable (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Do3722, Sept. 26, 2013). (b) The following circumstances recognized by the evidence duly adopted and duly examined by the court are: (i) even if the injured person tried to raise his cement or friasite in two times at the time of the police investigation, thereby preventing him from spreading into the bones of the police at the time of the interrogation; and (ii) even if the Defendant had made a statement to the effect that he had made a statement to the effect that he had been found to have been aware of his son’s son at the time of the suspect.