The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor of the misunderstanding of facts and the legal doctrine, it is sufficiently recognized that the Defendant’s electronic shock machines are subject to permission to possess.

However, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the safety management of guns, swords, explosives, etc. and thereby adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court (4 million won in penalty) is too unhued and unfair.

2. Determination

가. 사실 오인 및 법리 오해 주장에 대한 판단 1) 원심의 판단 원심은, “ 전자 충격 기를 데니까 찌릿찌릿 했고, 깜짝 놀랐는데 그렇게 심하지는 않았습니다.

The part of the G’s statement, “,” was shocked five times with the electronic shock machine, and the shock was exceeded.

The term "," has not lost the awareness and has been exceeded several times.

The court found the Defendant not guilty of this part of the charges on the ground that it is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant’s statement of “H,” the Defendant’s electronic shock machine similar to that of the electronic shock machine describing the Defendant, or the Defendant’s failure to submit the electronic shock machine as constituting an electronic shock machine for which he/she is capable of temporarily making human activities difficult or having net high-tension current so that he/she may cause harm to human life.

2) In the instant court’s judgment, the conviction should be based on evidence of probative value, which leads a judge to have the conviction that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, if there is no such evidence, even if there is suspicion of guilt against the Defendant, the conviction should be based on the benefit of the Defendant (Supreme Court Decision 2006.03.09.)