The appeal is dismissed.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

The burden of proving the facts charged in a criminal trial is to be borne by a public prosecutor, and the conviction is to be based on evidence with probative value that makes the judge feel true beyond reasonable doubt. Thus, if there is no such evidence, the doubt of guilt is against the defendant even if there is no such evidence.

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

(2) In order to establish the crime of rape, the perpetrator’s assault and threat shall be limited to the extent that it makes it impossible or considerably difficult for the victim to resist, and the extent that the assault and threat would make it impossible or considerably difficult for the victim to resist. On the other hand, whether the assault and threat was likely to make it impossible or considerably difficult for the victim to resist shall be determined by taking into account not only the content and degree of the assault and threat, the circumstances leading up to exercising force, the relationship with the victim, the circumstances at the time of sexual intercourse, and the subsequent circumstances.

In light of the above legal principles and records, it is reasonable for the court below to hold the charged facts of this case not guilty on the ground that there is no proof of crime, and to find the facts not guilty in violation of the rules of logic and experience and free evaluation of evidence, as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

There is no error of misapprehending the legal principles concerning assault and threat in the crime of rape.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.