The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (fact-finding) is as follows: (a) the victim suffered the upper body above the bones of the sublime in this case; (b) the victim's body was teared; and (c) in light of the parts and shapes of the body suffered by the victim, it should be viewed as the upper body that occurred beyond the floor while the defendant was bread and bread; and (d) there is no discrepancy between the victim's statement and the husband's statement and the victim's husband's statement to the extent that the credibility is doubtful; and (b) the defendant's act of assaulting the victim by destroying the breath of the body can be sufficiently recognized.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The lower court determined that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone, based on the following facts: (a) the victim’s statement and the victim’s husband’s statement are not consistent or inconsistent with each other’s detailed contents of the assault committed by the Defendant; (b) it is difficult to believe that the victim’s clothes on the day of the instant case were teared and flaged; (c) although it was confirmed that the victim’s flag was flaged, the victim’s flag was flaged; (d) the victim’s flag could not be excluded from the possibility of being injured by flaging or exposing the flag in the process of destroying banner, etc

The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, that is, the victim at the place of the investigation agency, when he wanted to cut the mar card which was cut after the mar card at the investigation agency, the defendant was not the defendant, was pushed down, was pushed down, and was pushed down with the defendant's bridge.

At that time, the defendant bridge was faced with the defendant.