The admissibility of evidence of the written evidence prepared by the judicial police officer against the victim E should be acknowledged, and according to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the defendant sufficiently recognized the facts of assault and indecent act by force as stated in the facts charged in the instant case. Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the victim of the instant facts charged is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles

2. Determination

The lower court acquitted the Defendant of the instant facts charged on the ground that it is difficult to view that the prosecutor’s proof alone does not allow the admissibility of the evidence of the written evidence prepared by the judicial police officer against the victim E, and the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone cannot be deemed to have been proven beyond reasonable doubt that the Defendant abused the victim and committed an indecent act by force against the victim as indicated in the instant facts charged.

Examining the above judgment of the court below closely by comparing it with the records, the judgment of the court below is justified. Contrary to the prosecutor's assertion, there is no error of law by misunderstanding facts or by misunderstanding the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. Therefore

3. Conclusion

Since the prosecutor's appeal is without merit, it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Kang Sung-young

Judges Yu-ju