위증
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, such as the lower court witness F, G’s statement, and criminal judgment on D, the gist of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) at the time when D’s indecent act by force and assaulted F, F, G, D, and the Defendant was at the time of committing an indecent act and assault against D’s F; (b) the Defendant appears to have committed a serious disturbance at the time of his indecent act and assault against D’s F; (c) while the Defendant stated that D was unable to completely memory that there was such disturbance; (d) while G stated that “G was accompanied by the Defendant at the time when D when D was at the time when D was in F, it was at the time when D was said that D was at the time when D was at the time when he was at the time when he was in F, it could be sufficiently recognized that D was guilty by making a false statement contrary to F’s memory, as stated in the facts charged,
2. Determination
A. In a criminal trial, the burden of proof for the facts constituting an offense prosecuted is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction is to be based on the evidence of probative value that makes the judge feel true beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, even if there is a suspicion of guilt against the defendant, it shall be determined with the benefit of the defendant.
(See Supreme Court Decision 201Do7261 Decided November 10, 2011, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do7261).
Based on the above legal principles, a thorough examination of the reasons for innocence of the lower judgment and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court is difficult to view that the lower court directly examined F and G as a witness, and completed the examination of the remaining evidence submitted by the prosecutor, with detailed explanation of the reasons, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is sufficient to conclude that there was proof to the extent that there was no reasonable doubt as to the facts charged of this case that “the Defendant had presented a false statement contrary to his memory.”