Although there are parts inconsistent with the victim's statement, such as changing the victim's statement, in light of the victim's age, situation at the time of the victim's statement, etc., there is sufficient credibility in the victim's statement that rape was committed by the defendant.

may be seen.

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

2. The burden of proving the facts charged in a criminal trial on the board is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction is to be based on the evidence with probative value that leads to the judge to have the truth that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, if there is no such evidence, even if there is doubt as to the defendant's guilt, it is inevitable to determine the defendant's interest (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do8675, Mar. 9, 2006). In a case where the defendant consistently denies the facts charged and the victim's statement is de facto only based on direct evidence consistent with the facts charged in the record, in order to find the defendant guilty on the basis of the victim's statement, there is a need to have high probative value that is beyond a doubt about the authenticity and accuracy of the statement, and in determining whether there is such probative value, the court below should comprehensively consider the reasonableness, consistency, objective reasonableness, etc. of the victim's statement made by the injured party and sufficiently consider the victim's credibility and credibility of the evidence.

see.