The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor’s summary of the grounds for appeal (in fact-finding or misunderstanding of legal principles), the Defendant had sexual intercourse with the victim against the victim’s will by using the fact that the victim had much more alcohol than those of the victim at the time of the crime of this case, was in the state of mental disorder or impossible to resist. Furthermore, it is sufficiently recognized that the Defendant had sexual intercourse with the victim against the victim’s will, by using the victim’s awareness of the main amount of the victim

Nevertheless, the lower court determined that there was no evidence of guilt against the facts charged in the instant case where the Defendant quasi-rapeed and forced indecent act by force on the grounds stated in its reasoning. In so doing, it erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine or misconception of facts.

2. Determination

A. The lower court, as an objective element of a crime, requires the victim’s “the state of mental or physical disability or impossibility to resist,” and, as a subjective element of a crime, recognizes the Defendant as a subjective element of a quasi-rape under Article 299 of the Criminal Act, the crime of quasi-rape under Article 299 of the Criminal Act is established. On the other hand, the prosecutor bears the burden of proving the criminal facts prosecuted in a criminal trial, and the prosecutor bears the burden of proving the truth of the facts charged to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt for the judge to the extent that the facts charged are true. If there is no such proof, the lower court based on the legal doctrine that the conviction cannot be determined even if there is suspicion of guilt against the Defendant, the following circumstances revealed in the record: (i) relationship with the Defendant and the victim; (ii) the circumstance of drinking alcohol on the day of the instant case; and (iii) the circumstance that the victim was unable to resist at the time of the instant case; and (iv) the Defendant and the victim thereafter.