Nevertheless, the court below rendered a not-guilty verdict on the facts charged as stated in its reasoning. The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. On December 17, 2015, the Defendant, at the residence of the victim D (Woo, 36 years of age) located in Ulsan Nam-gu around 23:00 on December 17, 2015, had sexual intercourse once with the victim’s clothes, where the Defendant had drinking alcohol by drinking alcohol to the victim who had been dismissed for a long time in his/her operating company, as he/she did so.

Accordingly, the defendant has sexual intercourse with the victim by taking advantage of the impossibility of resistance.

B. In light of the legal principles of the judgment and the circumstances established by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the prosecutor, the lower court, based on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, proved without any reasonable doubt that the victim was physically and mentally lost or resisted at the time of the instant case, and that the Defendant had the intent to have sexual intercourse with the victim by recognizing the victim’s status and using it.

It is difficult to see otherwise, and on the ground that there is no evidence sufficient to acknowledge it, the above facts charged was acquitted.

Examining the judgment of the court below in comparison with the evidence duly adopted and examined, the judgment of innocence by the court below is just and acceptable, and there is an error of law by mistake as alleged by the prosecutor.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the prosecutor's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.