Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the facts charged of this case is erroneous, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. On April 27, 2019, the Defendant, at around 18:00, 18:00 of the facts charged in the instant case, was coming to the separate collection place near the apartment Cdong in Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, and was in excess of the victim D (9 years of age), the victim E (nive, 9 years of age), and the victim’s own hand floor was sent only once as the victim D’s her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her

Accordingly, the defendant forced victims under the age of 13 to commit indecent acts.

3. Judgment on the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts

A. Criminal facts in a criminal trial should be recognized as a strict evidence that has the probative value to the extent that the judge has no reasonable doubt. Thus, in a case where the prosecutor fails to prove to the extent that he/she has a sufficient conviction, even if there are circumstances, such as the defendant’s assertion or defense contradictory or uncomfortable, and there is suspicion of guilt, it should be determined as the defendant’s benefit.

(see Supreme Court Decision 2012Do231, Jun. 28, 2012). Meanwhile, considering the difference between the method of evaluating credibility of the first instance court and the appellate court according to the spirit of substantial direct and psychological principle adopted by the Criminal Procedure Act, the first instance court’s judgment on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance court is clearly erroneous in light of the contents of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, or the first instance court’s judgment was additionally made at the time of the closing of arguments in the appellate court.