The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the court below found the defendant not guilty of the facts charged in the case of this case because the defendant failed to make identification of brain brain itself at the first brain examination and did not take measures against the danger of brain - and thereby caused the death of the victim. However, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles and erroneous determination of facts.

Judgment

In a criminal trial, the prosecutor bears the burden of proving the criminal facts prosecuted in the criminal trial, and the conviction should be based on strict evidence with probative value, which makes the judge feel true beyond a reasonable doubt (Article 307(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act). Therefore, if there is no such evidence, even if there is a doubt that the defendant is suspected of a crime, the judgment of conviction should be based on the benefit of the defendant.

(See Supreme Court Decision 91Do1385 delivered on August 13, 1991). A thorough examination of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone, as stated in the court below, is negligent by the defendant in relation to the death of the deceased.

It is insufficient to recognize that the death of the deceased has a causal relationship with the negligence of the defendant, there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, and there is no new evidence in the trial.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant is erroneous or misunderstanding the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, and the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.