2. In a judgment, the prosecutor bears the burden of proving the criminal facts prosecuted in a criminal trial, and the conviction should be based on the evidence of probative value, which makes the judge feel true to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt that the facts charged are true.

Therefore, if there is no such evidence, even if there is no such evidence, the defendant is suspected to be guilty.

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

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do1151, Jul. 22, 2010). In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by each evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, the evidence alone submitted by the prosecutor alone committed an indecent act against the victim as shown in the facts charged.

It is difficult to see that the intention of the accused’s indecent act is proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

1) As shown in the above facts charged, the victim’s statement at an investigative agency and the victim’s flight of stairs are resisting the defendant, and there is CCTV images containing the appearance of the above DNA shop employee’s report. 2) The victim was viewed out of the window in the window located in the front stairs of the DNA shop, but the victim stated that the defendant, who was getting out of the stairs, was able to take charge of the victim’s left her hand.

However, considering the following circumstances, it is difficult to believe that the statements of the victim are in trust.

3. In addition, CCTV.