The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the victim was raped by the Defendant at the time and place indicated in the facts charged, and stated specifically and consistently that he suffered injury in the process, the victim’s psychological and physiological test results, medical records, etc. conform to the victim’s statement, and even if there is any inconsistency with objective evidence, such as text messages, etc., even though the victim’s continuous rape from the Defendant during the victim’s statement contradicts the objective evidence, such inconsistency is due to the fact that the victim’s mistake in the open court, which committed the Defendant’s incompetence, was excessively defensively defensive because it was difficult to recognize his own mistake in the open

Nevertheless, the lower court determined that it was difficult to believe the victim’s statement on the grounds of the circumstances stated in its holding, and that there was insufficient evidence to prove the facts charged in the instant case. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending

2. The lower court: (a) stated that the victim was raped from the Defendant more than eight months a week, but during that period, sent a number of text messages to the effect that he/she prepared an organ in advance or love the Defendant; (b) on April 23, 2015, before the third day of the instant case, the Defendant was even sexual intercourse with his/her own house; and (c) the victim was raped from the Defendant on April 26, 2015; (d) the statement of the situation before and after that date is not consistent; (c) the Defendant was dissatisfy with the Defendant; (d) the victim was satisfy with the Defendant on April 28, 2015; and (e) the victim did not have been raped with the Defendant as described in the instant facts charged; and (e) the victim’s statement made on April 28, 2015, considering the following as a whole, the victim’s statement made in the instant case.