The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of the summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts), the facts charged against the defendant is sufficiently recognized.

2. Determination:

A. The lower court’s judgment: (a) the victim’s statement about the circumstance of the Defendant appears to be reversed in accordance with objective evidence, such as sexual assault victim’s medical record or genetic appraisal report; (b) considering the fact that the victim was unable to easily understand the difference between the victim’s statement and the victim’s statement when committing the crime, even though the victim’s statement appears to have a clear memory by taking advantage of the fact that the victim’s scambling 2 eggs exempted from the number of ingredients at the time of the crime; and (c) if the Defendant attempted to engage in sexual intercourse against the victim’s will, such as the victim’s statement, it appears that the victim’s body was damaged; (b) the record of sexual assault victim’s medical record includes “a fixed amount of sexual assault victim’s statement,” which is not completely different from the victim’s statement, this part of the victim’s statement is inconsistent with objective circumstances; (c) the circumstance leading up to the victim’s first statement and the prosecutor’s office’s statement that partially changed the victim’s statement and the record of this case’s statement are inconsistent with the lower court.