The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment by rejecting the victim's statement on the summary of the grounds for appeal, despite credibility, and thereby not guilty of the defendant's crime.

2. In light of the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of evaluating credibility, the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by the first instance court was clearly erroneous in light of the content of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined in the first instance court, and the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by the first instance court.

Unless there are extenuating circumstances to view that the first instance court’s decision on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court is significantly unfair, or in full view of the results of the first instance court’s examination and the results of the further examination of evidence conducted until the closing of the appellate trial, the appellate court should not reverse without permission the first instance court’s decision on the grounds that the first instance court’s decision on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court is different from the appellate court’s decision.

In particular, when the first instance judgment rejecting the credibility of a witness’s statement supporting the facts charged is followed, it should be said that there are sufficient and adequate circumstances acceptable in light of the presumption of innocence and the principle of the burden of proof of criminal case (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Do4994, Nov. 24, 2006). The lower court acknowledged the facts as stated in its reasoning based on the evidence admitted by the court below, and, in light of such facts, acknowledged the facts as stated in its reasoning, the victim’s statement lacks credibility and it is difficult to recognize that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone rape the victim as stated in the facts charged.

The decision was determined.

In full view of the legal principles as seen earlier, the lower court’s determination is based on the evidence duly admitted by the lower court and the lower court.