The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The case is remanded to the Incheon District Court Panel Division.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is recognized as a retaliation against E in a criminal case against the defendant, so even if the victim of the harmful act is the husband of E, the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, etc., even though the victim is the husband of E, the court below dismissed the prosecution on the premise that only the crime of assault under the Criminal Act is constituted. Such judgment of the court below is erroneous in matters of law

2. Determination

A. On May 13, 2013, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 2 million for a crime that stated that “the Defendant, at around 06:10 on February 24, 2013, at the time of E from a D restaurant located in Namdong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, the Defendant inflicted an injury on E, such as a multi-closion, etc., requiring approximately four weeks’ treatment.” On the other hand, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 2 million for a formal trial with the same court order of KRW 200,000,000. On the other hand, the Defendant requested formal trial with the same court order of KRW 2013 High-Ma1793 on February 27, 2013.

6. 21. On the date of trial opened, the above request for formal trial was withdrawn, and a fine of KRW 2 million was finalized on the same day.

During the investigation process of the above case, the Defendant considered that E had made a statement of damage, and had a mind of retaliation against E.

At around 01:30 on June 22, 2013, the Defendant, at the above D restaurant operated jointly by E and the victim F (58 years of age) who is her husband, took care of the victim who is the victim of the new wall business, the Defendant: (a) “I would have been subject to a fine of KRW 2 million per annum; (b) I would not run the sprink; (c) I would not run the sprink; and (d) I would have sprinked the shape of the victim, sprinked the victim, and got the victim.”

As a result, the defendant committed violence to the victim for the purpose of retaliation against the provision of investigation teams and statements in connection with the investigation or trial of his criminal case.

B. The lower court’s judgment is to investigate a criminal case against himself/herself or another person in full view of the circumstances as stated in the lower judgment.