The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The Defendant, on the Internet, was aware of the victim D (the age of 13) that included a letter that “a person seeks a well locking place,” and was unable to return the victim at his own house located in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E Apartment 911 Dong 1308 on April 14, 2012.

After that, on April 23, 2012, the Defendant had had had the victim had the victim had had sexual intercourse again with his/her home on April 23, 2012.

Around 02:00 on April 24, 2012, the Defendant: (a) reported that the victim was able to enjoy in her own house by suffering counter-fluor and pitrts; (b) exceeded the victim’s half-bat and clothes; (c) threatened the victim’s arms and legs going on board and resisting the vessel; and (d) led the victim to sexual intercourse once with the victim.

2. The Defendant and his defense counsel’s argument only sleeps in the bed, such as the victim, at the time and place specified in the facts charged, and did not have a sexual relationship.

3. Determination

A. The burden of proof of the facts charged in a criminal trial of the relevant legal doctrine lies on the prosecutor, and the conviction of the guilty ought to be based on the evidence of probative value that makes the judge feel true to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, the doubt of guilt against the defendant is between the suspect even if there is no such evidence.

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do9633, Nov. 11, 2010). In addition, in a case where the credibility of a victimized juvenile’s statement is at issue as seen in the instant case, a comprehensive review should be given to the following: (a) whether the content of the statement is consistent and clear; (b) whether the content is extensive; (c) whether the content of the statement contains a description of the characteristic of the perpetrator of the case; and

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Do2520, Jul. 10, 2008). B.

According to each evidence duly examined by this Court, a prosecutor who has submitted a suspicion of guilt, the victim is the victim.