The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles), the Defendant and the victim stayed for about one minute in front of the electric telegram, so the Defendant could have committed an indecent act against the victim by taking into account the following facts: (a) the Defendant could have taken the front door to the victim and committed an indecent act against the victim; (b) the Defendant was not somewhat consistent with the victim’s statement on the front door and after the time of the indecent act; but (c) the victim’s age was eight years old; and (d) the Defendant’s statement on the part of the victim was completely consistent and life, and even according to the result of the statement analysis with respect to the victim, the credibility of the victim’s statement is high and it is determined that the Defendant committed an indecent act against the victim.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the charged facts of this case is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles or affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The lower court, in light of the circumstances indicated in its reasoning, based on the evidence revealed in the records, has high probative value, excluding a reasonable doubt because the victim’s statement was not reliable in major parts.

Therefore, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of the instant facts charged on the ground that the instant facts charged are insufficient to acknowledge the facts charged solely with the said statement, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge the said facts charged.

In full view of the circumstances in the reasoning of the court below acknowledged by the record, the above judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as alleged by the prosecutor.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.