The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, although the defendant appeared as a witness in the trial of injury by negligence in the Gwangju District Court Decision 2013Kadan5763 of the Gwangju District Court Decision 2013Kadan5763 of the defendant's judgment on injury by negligence in the field of the defendant, the defendant stated that "C was in excess of E," and the above police officer did not ask him/her for the above case, and it is sufficiently recognized that the above police officer made a false testimony that the above police officer did not have made the above remarks, the judgment below which acquitted the defendant, and there is a violation of the law of misunderstanding of legal principles and the principle of free evaluation of evidence.

2. The judgment below affirmed the judgment of the court below in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the testimony of the Gwangju District Court 2013 High Court 2013 High Court 5763 (third trial records) concerning Police Officers D, which are direct evidence as shown in the facts charged, based on the testimony of the court below in the judgment below, D, E, and G, the police officer D, who was sent to the site upon receiving a report of 112 at the time, mainly after receiving a specific statement about the accident circumstance from E, and securing personal information and contact information of the defendant with the consent of the defendant who was present at the time to secure witness or witness by a third party without interests, but did not listen to specific statements from the defendant, but did not hear specific statements from the defendant when he asked the defendant about the accident circumstance. However, in light of the fact that D, who was asked about the accident circumstance of the defendant, was merely slicking the defendant, it is hard to believe this fact and there is no other evidence to acknowledge the facts charged. For this reason, the court below's judgment is justified.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is without merit.