The appeal by the prosecutor is dismissed.

1. According to the summary of the grounds for appeal (definites) D, E, and F consistently, the Defendant stated that he was sealed the victim E as described in the facts charged, and the fact that D is recognized as having “dyp dyp dyp dyp dyp dyp dyp dyp dyp?” This fact is not against D’s dyp dyp dyp, and the Defendant did not resist that he was not sealed the victim, and the injury diagnosis report against the victim was written, it is sufficiently recognized that the Defendant inflicted an injury by pushing the victim.

The judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant.

2. Determination

A. The amendment of indictment to the indictment is in the first instance and the following.

As seen in this paragraph, the court below found the injury found not guilty as the primary charge and added the points of assault as the preliminary charge.

Even if the above indictment is modified, the prosecutor's assertion of misconception of facts about the primary facts is still subject to the judgment of this court.

B. 1) The lower court found the Defendant not guilty of the facts charged in this case on the following grounds: (a) D and E state to the effect that the Defendant was subjected to E in the following after having pushed the Defendant’s chest by hand; and (b) if the Defendant was pushed the Defendant’s chest, the chest part should be cut back; (c) thereby, it would be against the empirical rule that the Defendant suffered an injury to the symptoms and thale of a double wall spathy in a double wall spath; and (d) thereby, it would be against the empirical rule.

On the other hand, the defendant is the adult of 166 cm, E is the male son in 2006, E is more than 7 years old at the time of the case, and the body is also narrow compared to the past. E is the floor of the entrance, and if the defendant was in a situation lower than the entrance, it is difficult for the defendant to contact the two descendants into the part of E, which is extending into the future.