A prosecutor bears the burden of proving the facts charged in a criminal trial.

In order to admit a guilty verdict, there shall be evidence of probative value sufficient to prove that the facts charged are true to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt by a judge.

Therefore, if there is no such evidence, even if there is suspicion of guilt against the Defendant, it is inevitable to determine that the Defendant is not guilty with the benefit of the Defendant (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Do4737, Feb. 24, 2006, etc.). Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the record, the lower court is justifiable to reverse the first instance judgment convicting the Defendant of violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles from Sexual Abuse among the facts charged in the instant case on the ground that there is no proof of crime

In so determining, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the principle of direct deliberation and court-oriented trials, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds

On the other hand, the prosecutor appealed the entire judgment of the court below, but did not state specific grounds for appeal as to the guilty portion in the final appeal and the reasons for appeal.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.