The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty, and the summary of the judgment of innocence is publicly notified.

1. The court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case, since the defendant did not have a misunderstanding that the defendant shouldered the F and sculed a beer disease against E, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case. Thus, the court below erred by mistake of facts.

2. Determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant’s authority, the prosecutor examined the case ex officio, and the prosecutor applied the applicable law to “special intimidation” under Articles 3(1) and 2(1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, and Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act, “Articles 284 and 283(1) of the Criminal Act” under “Article 284 of the Criminal Act” and “Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act,” and applied for changes in the contents of each change. Since this court permitted this, the judgment below was no longer maintained.

However, there is an amendment to the indictment above.

Even if the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, this paper first examines this issue.

B. Around March 9, 2014, around 03:45, the Defendant: (a) viewed that female-friendly job offering E, in front of the toilet located in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government “D main office,” had a dispute over the victim F (n, 22 years of age) and the toilet screen, and (b) made a horse-friendly job offering E, who was able to attract the victim into the entrance, and made a threat to the victim, and to the victim, and to the victim E.

(c)

The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court.

(d)

Although the Defendant had consistently demanded F to kill the police from the police to the trial of the party, the Defendant denied the facts charged of the instant case, the Defendant did not require be subject to a large and large apology under the F’s item by shouldering beer disease.

Therefore, the defendant shouldered the beer's disease F.