The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and improper sentencing);

A. According to the statements, etc. of the victim D and E, the fact that the defendant injured the victim is sufficiently recognized. However, the judgment of the court below which judged otherwise as to the injury of the victim D among the facts charged in this case, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (three million won in penalty) is too unhued and unfair.

2. Determination

A. 1) The lower court determined as to the assertion of mistake of facts: ① under the investigation conducted by the police immediately after the instant case, the Defendant was satisfing and sating bats with each other, and did not receive treatment on the grounds that there was no injury or injury to hospital treatment.

The statement was made by the prosecutor that the defendant was faceed by his head, and in this court, the defendant was taken 5 to 6 faces from his head in the situation that the other fest of the defendant is attached to him in this court, and the defendant was taken 5 to ging.

The statement was made to the extent that it is not consistent with the statement, and that it was difficult to drink boom due to a serious pain immediately after the case.

In the initial investigation, it is difficult for the prosecutor's office and the prosecutor's office and the prosecutor's office of this court to believe that the failure of the witness in the initial investigation to make a statement of such damage is not a common sense, and the witness at the time and the witness at the time considered that all the defendant and D were flicking and flicking each other.

The evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone can not be a direct evidence of the fact that the defendant inflicted a bodily injury, considering the following facts: (a) the defendant only made a statement, and there is no statement to the effect that the defendant received a face of D from his head; and (c) the medical certificate of D was based on the statement of D after the case and the cause of the bodily injury itself cannot be a direct evidence of the fact that the defendant inflicted a bodily injury.