The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. According to the statement of the victim of mistake of facts, etc., although the defendant could sufficiently recognize the fact that the defendant inflicted bodily injury on the victim's left left side by coffee spawn disease at the time of the instant case, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of an unreasonable sentencing (one million won of a fine) by the lower court is too unjustifiable and unfair.

2. Determination

A. The victim claiming a misunderstanding of facts stated consistently from the investigative agency to the court of the court below that the defendant had made two times the left eye of the victim due to a glass disease, while the defendant denies from the investigative agency that there was no fact that he had been living the victim due to a consistent glass disease. As to the facts charged in this case, the defendant can be viewed as "where the defendant had two times the left eye of the victim due to a coffee glass disease" among the facts charged in this case.

The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below and the court below, i.e., ① the victim stated in the investigative agency and the court below that “I am at the time of the instant case’s coffee and spawd the victim’s eye by satisfly satisfying twice the victim’s eye and satisfying the victim’s satisfy,” but H at the time of the instant case stated that “I am at the time of the instant case’s presentation that I am at the investigative agency and the court of the first instance would not see that I am at the time of the Defendant’s injury to the victim’s satisfy,” and the F am at the investigative agency that “I am at the time of the instant case’s presentation that I am at the time of the Defendant’s and the victim’s satisfy away from the floor at the time of the instant coffee.”