The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

However, for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. In full view of the victim's police statements and investigation reports (section 9 of the Investigation Record), the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of the facts charged of this case, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

2. Determination:

A. The lower court found the Defendant not guilty on the ground that “The witness E’s testimony at the court below held that “the victim was her seat before her cover with the Defendant, and the Defendant was her seated with a stone, and that the Defendant was her stone with the stone, and that the Defendant was her stone with the stone.” The witness E’s testimony at the court below is considerably reliable because it does not violate specific and other evidence, and the victim’s testimony at the court below and the above court testimony at E are reasonable. In light of the victim’s legal testimony at the court below and the above court testimony at the court below, it is difficult to see that the victim’s police statement was correct, and the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone alone is insufficient to prove that the facts charged at issue were beyond reasonable doubt.

B. However, considering the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, it is deemed that the victim and E’s legal statement in the court below is difficult to believe, and it is remarkably unfair to maintain the credibility judgment of the above statement in the court below.

① The victim filed 112 reports that he/she would have received immediately after the occurrence of the instant case.

In addition, 4 days after the occurrence of the instant case, the police officer appeared in the police and stated that the Defendant and the Defendant were in dispute while drinking alcohol in the C apartment shelter, such as the Defendant and E, and the Defendant saw the stone with the stone with the stone attached in the vicinity of the rest area, and stated that “the Defendant was in front of the right snow in the snow with the stone attached and the snow,” and that “the other police officer who was in charge of the instant investigation was fluent with the stone attached several times.”