The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the facts that the defendant caused the victim to take shot drugs after having the victim take the shot drugs, and rape the victim and suffered bodily injury can be acknowledged.

In particular, the statements of the victim are consistent and reliable.

Nevertheless, the lower court rendered a not-guilty verdict on the charge of rape injury. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

A prosecutor of the amendment of indictment (in addition to the facts charged in the preliminary charge) maintains the facts charged of the injury resulting from rape, which was judged not guilty at the court below, and applied for the amendment of indictment with respect to "the injury resulting from quasi-rape" in Articles 301, 29, and 297 of the Criminal Act in the name of the crime as stated in paragraph (1) below and "the injury resulting from quasi-rape," and the name of the crime.

In this paper, the reasons for appeal concerning the primary facts charged by the prosecutor and the ancillary facts added in the trial are examined in order.

Judgment on the grounds for appeal by a prosecutor

A. On March 3, 2017, the summary of the facts charged by the Defendant: (a) around 11:30 on March 3, 2017, the Defendant: (b) considered the victim’s philosophical hall operated by the Defendant as a ordinary customer and provided water to the victim; (c) considered the victim’s mind as mixed; (d) was placed on the victim’s floor; and (d) was exempted from the victim’s load; and (e) the victim was raped once by inserting the victim’s sexual organ into the part of the victim’s sound; and (e) caused the victim’s injury, such as the left part of the left part, which requires medical treatment for about 21 days.

Accordingly, the defendant raped the victim by assault and caused the injury to the victim.

B. The lower court determined that the Defendant operated by the victim recognized by comprehensively taking account of the adopted evidence.