The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is consistent with the statement that the victim (F) was assaulted by the defendant on the day of the instant case, and the victim's statement by his/her father and wife also conforms to the victim's statement, and thus, it is recognized that the defendant used the victim's assault. However, the judgment below erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby affecting the conclusion of

2. Determination

가. 이 사건 공소사실의 요지 피고인은 2013. 7. 5. 19:30경 부산 동래구 D, 103동 403호(E아파트) 자신의 주거지에서, 한의원 일을 마치고 귀가한 피고인을 배우자인 피해자가 쳐다본다는 이유로 “왜 고개를 빳빳이 쳐들고 꼴쳐 보느냐 ”고 하면서, 양 손바닥으로 피해자의 양쪽 뺨을 3~4회 때리고, 소파에 앉아 있는 피해자의 가슴 부위를 1회 걷어차서 뒤로 넘어지게 하는 등 피해자를 폭행하였다.

B. In full view of the evidence adopted and examined by the lower court, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty on the ground that there is insufficient evidence to support that “the Defendant abused F at the time and place indicated in the facts charged,” to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt on the following grounds.

(1) First, the copy of the recording that the F recorded the contents of telephone conversations with the Defendant after the occurrence of the instant case and submitted to the police is hearsay evidence as to the Defendant’s statement. In addition, the F’s legal statement to the effect that the Defendant did not consent to the recording as evidence, as well as that the recording file, etc., which served as the basis of the recording, was not submitted as evidence, should not be deemed to have satisfied the requirements for the establishment of the authenticity under Article 313(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and thus, the copy of the recording cannot be admitted as evidence because it has no admissibility.

Sheet: 1. F.