The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

The summary of the facts charged in the instant case was around 04:50 on June 9, 2017, the Defendant committed an indecent act against the victim D (one’s name, one’s age, and 18) who was locked together with male-parent families in the 3rd Amhs room located in Yasan City B, by inserting his hand into the victim’s seat, and using the victim’s state of failing to resist.

The court below found the defendant not guilty on the ground that there is a statement in the victim, the victim's male-gu E, witness F's investigative agency or the court of the court below which corresponds to the facts charged of this case, and the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, including the above statements, lack of conviction that the facts charged of this case is true beyond reasonable doubt, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

According to the statements of the victim, E, and F, the court below acquitted the Defendant on the ground that the credibility of the statements of the victim, E, and F, could be sufficiently recognized. In so doing, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles.

In the judgment of this court, the prosecutor bears the burden of proving the criminal facts prosecuted in the criminal trial, and the conviction should be based on the evidence of probative value that makes the judge feel true beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, if there is no such evidence, the defendant is suspected of guilty, even if there is no such evidence.

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do1151, Jul. 22, 2010). According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the following facts can be acknowledged.

Around 00:20 on June 9, 2017, the victim and E were admitted to a sobrying bank around 00:41.

The defendant paid soup not only the soup fee but also the bath fee.