The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) is consistent with the fact that the victim of this case was committed an indecent act, such as the facts charged, from the investigative agency to the court of the court below, even though it is somewhat lacking in recognition and judgment ability as a intellectual disabled person, and the witness C was in a state of personal weak points on the defendant, and the witness C was serving as a public interest service personnel and was in a state of personal weak points on the defendant, so the defendant was unable to bullying

Since the facts charged against the defendant are found guilty in view of the fact that it is possible to recognize the credibility of C's prosecutor's statement by clearly explaining the grounds why the statement was reversed, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

2. The court below held that ① the victim filed a complaint with the original defendant to the effect that he was forced sexual assault and rape by the victim, ② the Defendant’s integrated support center for the victims of sexual assault and the police stated that “the victim committed an indecent act as stated in the facts charged, as well as the Defendant’s indecent act, and was forced to leave his clothes after the victim was placed on the bed in the bed, and forced to do so,” and subsequently, the Defendant and F divided the message to the effect that “the Defendant was unable to rape the victim, and the contents of such accusation are false,” and divided the message to the same effect into F. The victim’s mother, “the fact that the victim was raped from the Defendant,” and the victim stated that “the victim was forced to commit an indecent act without being rape,” and that “the victim was forced to speak from the Defendant and the victim’s mother to the effect that he was forced to do so.”