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.

(2) The lower court found the Defendant not guilty on the ground that the witness F’s testimony alone was an indecent act against the victim C, on the grounds indicated in its reasoning, on the grounds indicated in its reasoning, since it is difficult to readily conclude that there was an indecent act against the victim C by the witness police officer, and the victim E appears not to have been aware that the relevant act was an indecent act before the police officer’s confirmation of damage. As such, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone alone cannot be deemed as having proved the facts charged of the instant case.

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