The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error) is that the Defendant, beyond the mere defensive level, performed a flabbage by exercising physical power against the victim and had the victim flab, but the lower court acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged in this case, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. On May 10, 2014, the Defendant, as the center of Daegu Northern-gu, Daegu-gu, as indicated in the facts charged, set up against the victim C (age 33) in a fluorial strip of the Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, the Defendant saw the victim’s breath and flaps into the ground.

B. The court below held that C, in the investigative agency and the court of the court below, stated that “A was aware of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below that “A was assaulted by C and did not breath or ebbbbb,” when the Defendant was present at the court of the court below and the court of the court below, the Defendant was pushed the Defendant, who was a passenger when the Defendant was present at the court of the court of the court below, and the Defendant was able to defend the Defendant, and the Defendant was able to defend the Defendant when he was flatd with the flat, and the Defendant was flated with the flat in the process of questioning whether the Defendant and the victim were in excess of the flat,” and that there was an accurate statement by the Defendant beyond the Defendant’s flat as stated above.”