The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor to the gist of the grounds for appeal, even though the court below acquitted the victim who had been under the influence of alcohol by taking advantage of the state of resistance impossibility, the court below found the defendant not guilty of the facts charged of this case. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged of the instant case is as follows: (a) from around 02:00 on January 21, 2017 to around 06:00, the Defendant, while under the influence of “D” 709 in Gyeonggi-si, Gyeonggi-do, with a view to rapeing the victim E (the name of the victim, the 42 years old), who was living together in the same mountain club in the ward and was living together in the ward, brought the victim under the influence of alcohol to another place; (b) brought the victim under the influence of alcohol, who was unable to resist by moving the fright that the victim was under the influence of alcohol to the other place; (c) putting his finger into the clothes of the victim; and (d) putting the victim’s sexual intercourse into the clothes of the victim.

Accordingly, the defendant committed similar rape by using the victim's resistance impossible condition.

B. The lower court and the lower court determined that the victim’s statement had a high probative value to the extent that there is no room for doubt as to the authenticity and accuracy of the victim’s statement, in light of the circumstances as indicated in its reasoning, etc., which are acknowledged by comprehensively considering the adopted evidence

In itself, it is doubtful whether the victim was damaged by quasi-Rape, and that the victim suffered such damage by domestic affairs.

Inasmuch as the person who committed such act cannot be readily determined as the Defendant, the evidence alone submitted by the prosecutor alone proves that the facts charged in the instant case are beyond reasonable doubt.

The lower court acquitted the Defendant of the instant facts charged on the ground that it was insufficient to view it.

2) Criminal facts charged in a criminal trial must be proved by the prosecutor, and the judge is true to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt.