The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In full view of the summary of the grounds for appeal (the fact-finding) of the victim's friendship E who observed the situation at the time of the instant case, it is reasonable to view that the defendant had a willful negligence in the indecent act by force, at least, committed an intentional act by force on the part of the victim, when considering the following: (a) the defendant was able to spuck the victim's bucks, and (b) the defendant stated that he was able to spuck the victim's spucks; and (c) the defendant was fully pushed down on the victim's side where spucks were sprinked

Nevertheless, the lower court rendered a judgment of innocence against the Defendant by misunderstanding the facts.

2. The prosecutor of the judgment is at the trial below:

As stated in paragraph (1), an application for changes in indictment was filed, and this court permitted it, and the subject of the adjudication was changed.

Therefore, as to the prosecutor's assertion, we will look at the prosecutor's argument on the premise that the indictment was modified as above.

On October 24, 2018, at around 01:35, the Defendant reported the victim D (28 years of age) within the 3 soup of the 3rd floor, i.e., “C,” and sitd up in the next place, and forced the victim to commit an indecent act by force.

B. 1) The burden of proving the facts charged in a criminal trial is to be borne by the prosecutor, and the conviction of guilt is to be based on the evidence with probative value that makes the judge feel true beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, if there is no such evidence, even if there is a doubt as to the defendant's guilt, it is inevitable to determine the defendant's interest in light of the above legal principles (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Do6110, Feb. 11, 2003).