2. In a judgment, the burden of proof for the criminal facts prosecuted in a criminal trial 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, the suspicion of guilt is between the defendant, even if there is no such evidence.

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Do1151 Decided July 22, 2010. The lower court found the Defendant not guilty on the ground that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone alone alone was insufficient to prove the facts charged of this case, in light of the following: (a) the victim stated that the Defendant was a witness to prove the facts charged of this case; (b) the victim stated that the Defendant was not a direct witness because he was satisfy in the process of investigation; and (c) the statement was maintained to the effect that the Defendant was a satfy in the process of investigation to the effect that he was a satfy; and (d) the statement was made to the effect that the Defendant was a satfy during the process of investigation to the lower court to the effect that he was a satfy, not a satfy, but a satfy or s

Examining the above judgment of the court below in light of the above legal principles, closely comparing the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the court below's determination of not guilty of the facts charged in this case is just and acceptable, and there is no new evidence which can be recognized in the trial, so the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is justified.