The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the summary of the grounds for appeal (in fact-finding) and the content of message dialogue between the Defendant and A, the Defendant was aware of the fact that the Defendant threatened A to the effect that he would spread his body pictures without complying with the victim’s sexual intercourse, and thus, the lower court did not recognize this part of the facts charged but did not err by misapprehending the legal principles.

2. Determination

A. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the Defendant appears to have never been aware of participation in the crime, and there is a possibility that A would have been unaware of the fact that he threatened the victim for the purpose of rape, and the evidence submitted by a prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant conspiredd to rape with A with A without any reasonable doubt.

① There is no statement in which A sent the Defendant any message with a content that he threatened the victim to spread his body pictures without complying with the victim’s sexual intercourse request.

② Although A had the body photographs of the victim, the Defendant did not give money when having sexual intercourse with the victim, the Defendant sent A any message stating that “the Defendant would be cruel to the victim,” the Defendant did not think that A would have threatened the victim with the body photographs.

③ 특히 피고인이 A에게 ‘갔는데 탕이면 개빡주의보’라고 하자 A가 ‘죽여버려야지, 다 유포한다’라고 하였는데, 이에 대하여 피고인이 ‘그거 범죄예요’라고 주의를 주기도 하였다.

B. We examine the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below in light of the circumstances presented by the court below.