The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding the facts), although the court below acquitted the defendant of the facts charged in this case on a different premise, it erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Amendments to Bill of Indictment (additional charges);

A. A. A prosecutor has reached the trial at the trial of the court below, while maintaining the facts charged as to the injury which was found not guilty at the court below. B. The prosecutor added the facts charged as to the assault as referred to in paragraph (1) as follows, and applied for the amendment of the indictment to add "Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act: Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act" to the applicable law, and the subject of the trial was added by the court

In the following, the grounds for appeal against the primary facts charged by the prosecutor and the ancillary facts added in the trial of the party are examined in order.

B. The Defendant, at around 11:45 on August 23, 2016, discussed the issue of compensation for commercial damage to the blasting of the new officetels in the victim E and the above new officetels in the middle-gu G building No. 5414, Jung-gu, Daegu, Seoul, and discussed either verbally.

At that time, the injured party had the victim's objection in the part of the defendant's wife.

Accordingly, the Defendant committed assaulting the victim at one time on the face of the victim’s face because the victim saw “ female her, why is why we see.”

3. Determination

A. The lower court’s judgment on the grounds of appeal as to the primary charge 1) is consistent with the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, namely, ① the Defendant consistently stated that there was no fact of committing the victim from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court, and ② the investigative agency of the victim and the victim.