The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal - the defendant, who is a factual error, can be found to have inflicted on the right side of the victim by making one-time a part of the victim's right side by leaving the left side after leaving the port, but the court below found the defendant not guilty of the facts.

2. Examining ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, the prosecutor applied for amendments to the indictment with respect to the injury by negligence and the charge that was subject to the judgment of the court below as the primary charge, and applied for addition of Article 266(1) of the Criminal Act to the ancillary charge and applicable provisions, and this court permitted this as follows.

As the subject of judgment was changed, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it is.

However, despite such reasons for ex officio destruction, the prosecutor's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, which will be examined below.

3. The judgment on the grounds of appeal (the judgment on the principal facts) is not consistent with the common sense that it is difficult for the court below to make a strong price to the right side due to the action that the person sitting on the right side of the port side elbows up with the height of the port side of the general humanitarian bridge, and that the person sitting on the right side due to the action that the person sitting on the right side elbows down with the right side. However, it is not sufficient to recognize that the defendant with a delay in spine in spine due to the above action does not cause an injury to the right side of the victim. Meanwhile, among the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, it is insufficient to recognize that the hole on the right side side of E by the injured diagnosis and the damaged photograph alone is based on the defendant's price, and it is not sufficient to acknowledge that there is no other evidence to prove the facts charged, and thus, the judgment of the court below is justified and it is justified.