The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Judgment on the Grounds for Appeal

A. The burden of proving the facts constituting an offense prosecuted in a criminal trial is to be borne by a prosecutor, and the conviction is to be based on evidence of probative value, which makes a judge not having reasonable doubt as to whether the facts charged are true, to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, the defendant is suspected of guilty.

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

(1) In order for a child victimized by sexual assault to be found guilty of the facts charged solely based on the victim’s statement to the extent that there is no room for doubt as to the authenticity and accuracy of the statement (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do16413, May 10, 201). In determining the credibility of a statement made to an investigation agency of a child victimized by sexual assault, the child’s age is strong, and the child’s age is likely to be confused with the circumstances or reality, or the source of memory is not well-known, taking into account the following: (a) how the child’s statement was made after the lapse of the time of the instant case; (b) how the guardian or investigator who first heard the facts damaged the child during the process of the instant statement from the time of occurrence to the time of its occurrence; and (c) how much the child’s statement had no influence on his or her memory by repeatedly questioning the child or not by questioning the child from the victim; and (d) whether the child’s statement was affected by repeated questioning.