The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Of the facts charged in the instant case of mistake of facts (not guilty part of the reasoning) concerning the fact that the Defendant inflicted injury on the victim by drinking the victim’s face at one time, according to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the Defendant’s face is sufficiently recognized.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted this part of the facts charged is erroneous and erroneous.

B. The sentence of an unreasonable sentencing (one million won of a fine) by the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court found the Defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged on the ground that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize the fact that the Defendant was a victim as stated in this part of the facts charged, in light of the circumstances as indicated in its reasoning, which could have been known through the records of the instant case.

Examining the above judgment of the court below after comparing it with records, the judgment of the court below is justified, and contrary to the prosecutor's assertion, there is no error of law by misunderstanding facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

The prosecutor's assertion of mistake is without merit.

B. The lower court determined the Defendant’s punishment on the assertion of unfair sentencing by taking into account the favorable circumstances and unfavorable circumstances for the Defendant as above.

In full view of all the circumstances that serve as conditions for sentencing in this court, the judgment of the court below was judged to have exceeded the reasonable scope of its discretion, or there is no special change in circumstances that may change the sentence of the court below.

In addition, even if comprehensively considering the sentencing factors revealed in the proceedings of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, environment, background and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentencing of the lower court does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion because it is too unhued.

The prosecutor's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. Conclusion.