The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. At the time of the instant case’s summary of the grounds of appeal, the Defendant’s act at the time of the instant appeal is merely a defect reading center by leaving the victim at one room for the singing practice room and blocking the victim from diving. Nevertheless, the lower court determined that “the Defendant inflicted an injury upon the victim by cutting down both arms of the victim into the knife and cutting down the victim towards the knife and pressing, etc.” In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant is the president of the branch of the Sing Practice Association C, and the victim D (at the age of 47) who assisted the Defendant to take over the “Esing Practice Center” by a third party, and subsequently, the Defendant inflicted an injury on the victim, such as salt, tension, etc. that requires approximately three weeks of treatment on October 17, 2015, on the ground that the Defendant attempted the Defendant to take over the “Esing Practice Center” at around 17:30, Seoul F and the second level of “Esing Practice Center” to take out from the “Esing Practice Center” to the left part of the victim, and caused the victim to go beyond the right part of the victim due to an outbreak, shoulder, etc.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged based on the victim’s legal statement, witness G and H’s respective legal statements.

(c)

Recognizing the conviction of the Defendant for a trial ought to be based on evidence with probative value, which leads to the conviction that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, even if there is doubt as to the Defendant’s conviction, it is inevitable to determine the benefit of the Defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do7261, Nov. 10, 201). Taking into account the following circumstances recognized by the lower court and the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the trial court, it is difficult to believe the victim’s statement in the lower court that conforms to the facts charged in the instant case, and the remainder submitted by the prosecutor.