The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In full view of the statements made by the victim D in light of the gist of the grounds of appeal, on the ground that the defendant was sufficiently aware of the fact that the victim was faced with the right-of-hand frame due to his shock while walking the victim from the stairs, and the victim was fully aware of the fact that the victim suffered the above injury, among the facts charged in this case, the victim was placed on the right-hand frame of the closure of the right-hand frame.

The judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant as to the facts.

2. Determination

A. On the facts charged against the victim D, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the part of the facts charged that “the Defendant damaged the victim’s face so that he can drink the victim’s face, and caused it to be sprinked.” On the other hand, the lower court acquitted the Defendant on the part that “the Defendant left the victim’s body by walking the body so as to fall under the bottom of the stairs that he walked the victim’s body, thereby leaving the victim’s body for treatment for about 42 days, thereby leaving the victim’s body down, thereby causing the victim’s closure of the right-of-hand frame that requires treatment for about 42 days (hereinafter referred to as

(b) The victim, C, F, and G are able to be admitted as evidence as to the circumstances in which the victim suffered a closed frame of the right-side frame.

1) 먼저 C의 진술에 관하여 보면, 그는 원심법정에서 ‘피해자가 피고인으로부터 얼굴을 맞아 계단에서 넘어졌고, 피고인이 넘어진 피해자를 발로 찼다’고 진술하였으나, 수사기관에서는 이와 달리 피해자가 넘어졌다는 언급 없이 ‘피해자가 어떻게 해서 골절상을 입었는지 모르겠다’고만 진술하여, 이 사건 발생 당시에는 피해자가 골절상을 입게 된 경위에 관하여 몰랐던 것으로 보이므로, 위 원심법정에서의 진술을 그대로 믿기 어렵다. 2) 피해자는, 수사기관에서 ‘공터와 건물 1층 입구에서 피고인에게 얼굴을 맞아 넘어진 적이 있는데 둘 중 언제 다친건지 모르겠다’는 취지로 진술하였다가,...