The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal: Error of facts and misapprehension of legal principles consistently state the damage from September 20, 2019 to the police statement made on September 20, 2019; the victim expressed his/her intention not to impose punishment in the prosecution on March 2, 2020 to reduce the situation as much as possible after the partial reversal of the police statement; the victim's legal statement is recognized to the effect that the defendant, the person subject to the request for an attachment order and the person subject to the request for a probation order (hereinafter "the defendant") have made a statement to the effect that the defendant's act was long; thus, the victim's mother has a motive to reduce and conceal the defendant's criminal act due to economic circumstances; however, it is consistent with the victim's statement; it also conforms to the victim's objective rationality and consistency in the prosecutor's office's statement; and thus, the victim's objective credibility and consistency in the part of the prosecutor's statement is also consistent with the victim's objective statement and the record.

In light of the victim’s statement, the victim’s mother’s statement, and the result of DNA appraisal, etc., the court below acquitted the charged facts of this case, but found the Defendant guilty. In so doing, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles or misapprehending the legal principles.

Judgment

The lower court’s judgment on the part of the Defendant case is difficult to recognize the credibility of the victim’s statement in full view of the circumstances as stated in its reasoning, which can be recognized by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court under the title “3.3.3 from the 3 to 10th of the judgment,” and the remaining evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone