The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

1. The "on-site recording file CD (Evidence No. 28) among the evidence submitted by the prosecutor (the fact-finding and misapprehension of legal principles) of the grounds for appeal (the evidence No. 28) is inadmissible as the victim recorded a conversation between the defendant and the police officer.

The CCTV images at the time of the incident do not confirm the form of assaulting the victim at the time when the victim was transferred, and it is difficult to believe the statements of the victim D and witness F.

Ultimately, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone cannot be proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which convicted the defendant is erroneous in misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. On September 18, 2017, the Defendant: (a) around 17:45 on September 18, 2017, in front of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu B Apartment-dong, the Defendant tried to resolve the instant issue through dialogue by gathering E with the victim’s mother E, while not having good reputation due to the victim’s mother E and son; (b) however, the victim was trying to interfere with it in the middle, and to remove the victim from E while speaking for the defect, he was pushed the victim over the floor by pushing the victim, and thereby, the Defendant suffered approximately three weeks of treatment.

B. The purport of Article 3(1) of the former Protection of Communications Secrets Act, which prevents a third party from recording or listening to a conversation between others that is not open to the public, is that a third party who does not participate in the conversation should not record or listen to the statement between others that make the conversation.

Therefore, a third party who does not participate in a conversation recording a statement between others that is not open to the public or listening to the statement by using an electronic or mechanical device is subject to Article 3(1) of the same Act, except in extenuating circumstances.