The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal consistently stated the situation at the time of damage from the fourth police investigation to the prosecution investigation and the court of original instance, and the police investigation prior to such investigation and the reason why the victim stated otherwise is specific and understandable.

In addition, the defendant also led to partial confession of the crime in the prosecution investigation.

Based on these evidences, the facts charged are sufficiently proven.

Therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The lower court’s judgment acknowledged various circumstances based on the evidence adopted and examined by the lower court, including the following circumstances, and, in light of the recognition circumstance, etc., the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone proves that the charge of rape was beyond reasonable doubt-finding to the extent that the Defendant’s exercise of force to suppress or significantly difficult the victim’s resistance was insufficient.

It is difficult to see

The decision was determined.

(1) The defendant, in the course of investigation conducted by the prosecution, has a sex relationship with the victim actively or explicitly without the consent of the victim, but does not make it impossible or remarkably difficult to resist the victim by means of violence or intimidation.

Only the statement was made to the effect that “..........”

(2) The court of the original instance shall have no time or threat to the defendant when the victim has sexual intercourse.

In light of the fact that the defendant stated "," it is difficult to believe the victim's statement in the court below that he was raped with the victim's head after being pushed the victim in the stairs.

③ On March 16, 2015, at around 03:00 on March 16, 2015, the time when the victim committed the offense indicated in the facts charged, the victim took a shower at home after having a sexual intercourse with the Defendant. At around 04:30 minutes past one hour and 30 minutes, the Defendant had a sexual intercourse again with the Defendant, and that is, the victim.