The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal (1) is as follows: ① the faces of E’s photograph taken immediately after the instant case is red; ② E has consistently made a statement from the Defendant to the effect that she was able to take head bonds and face over the floor, etc.; ② the statement made at the lower court can be seen as a concrete statement; ③ the visit of the hospital at the point of five days after the instant case occurred to issue the diagnosis certificate, while E continues to walk, and there is no big address to the hospital, and ④ it appears that she was able to take care of the Defendant at the time of her hair, and that it is hard to find the Defendant guilty of the facts charged, ④ it appears that there is no sufficient evidence to acknowledge that she was able to take care of the fact that she was able to take care of, and that she was able to take care of, the defendant, and that she was able to take care of the victim, ⑤ it appears that there was an unlawful act that she was an act corresponding to her punishment.

2. Determination

A. The lower court determined as follows: (a) the statements made by the victim’s investigative agency and the victim’s statement in this court, as seen in the facts charged of the instant case, appear where the victim suffered from a sacriffying; (b) the victim’s photograph taken immediately immediately after the instant case does not show any specific scambling of the upper part; and (c) the police at the time of the investigation on August 28, 2012.