2. In light of the following circumstances, the lower court determined that the instant facts charged was proven without any reasonable doubt by the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone.

The defendant was acquitted on the ground that it is difficult to see it and there is no evidence to acknowledge it.

A. A. A. The victim’s attempted attempt to enter the bus on September 21, 2015, stating that the victim was on board the bus to take practical training on A.I.D. on September 21, 2015. A. However, the victim’s telephone conversations with the Defendant on the aforementioned date. However, the victim’s telephone conversation did not have any details on the telephone conversation with the Defendant on the said date.

② At an investigative agency, F stated as if the Defendant had been directly aware of the fact that the Defendant had a Kakao message sent by the Defendant to the victim. However, at the court of the original instance, F reported the Kakao message to the victim.

In addition to the statement, it is not consistent with the statement made by the defendant and the victim that no message was given to the defendant and the Kakao Stockholm in relation to the content that the bank was sa.

③ The statements made by the victim are inconsistent with the statements made by the said G and H, while the victim was going to go to the I Et while the victim was going to go to the I Et, while the victim did not go to the I Et, and the statements made by the said G and H are not consistent.

B. The victim of public conflict ordered a hamber on the ground that "the defendant brought about money by bringing about money to the defendant, and the defendant called the victim by phoneing to the victim, and ordered the hamber. The calculation is again given money to the victim by the defendant.