2. Determination

A. Article 307(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that “The recognition of a criminal fact shall reach the degree of proof with no reasonable doubt.”

Therefore, the conviction in a criminal trial should be based on evidence of probative value, which leads a judge to the conviction that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt.

In a case where the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone does not reach the degree of conviction, the determination should be made with the benefit of the defendant even if there is a suspicion of guilt.

(see, i.e., Supreme Court Decision 2016Do21231, Oct. 31, 2017). In order to consistently deny the facts charged by the Defendant based on the victim’s statement, which is the only evidence supporting the facts charged, to find the Defendant guilty on the basis of the victim’s statement, the credibility of the facts charged ought to be ensured to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt as to the victim’s statement in light of the reasonableness and feasibility of the contents of the statement itself, objective circumstances and empirical rule, etc.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Do7945, Nov. 26, 2015). B.

The specific decision-making court determined that the victim’s statement, the only evidence supporting the facts charged, is hard to view that the victim’s statement, which is the only evidence supporting the facts charged, has credibility to the extent that the facts charged are true, and that each evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone cannot be deemed as proven without reasonable doubt that the Defendant committed a crime identical to the facts charged.

The following are revealed by the evidence adopted and investigated by the court below.