The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to CCTV images that show the consistent statement of the victim and the actions of the victim following the occurrence of the damage, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and thereby acquitted the Defendant.

2. In full view of the victim’s statement, the victim argued that “The victim, at the front corridor of the female toilet of the commercial building, she committed an indecent act against her knife, her knife, and her knife, her knife, her knife, and her knife away from the building immediately after her knife. The victim discovered the defendant who entered the above female toilet and her knife, considered the defendant as an offender, and resisted the defendant to commit an indecent act against the defendant who was committed in the male toilet,” and that “The defendant argued that “I do not know who the victim was committed an indecent act against his knife, but the defendant did not commit an indecent act against the victim.”

In the instant case where the identity of the criminal who committed an indecent act against the victim and the criminal defendant is at issue, the lower court determined that it is difficult to readily conclude that the victim’s statement alone was an offender at the scene after a certain period of time, and acquitted the criminal.

Examining the above judgment of the court below closely after comparison with the records, the court below’s determination that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone did not prove the facts charged of this case without any reasonable doubt is just and acceptable. In so doing, the court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as alleged by the prosecutor.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

3. Thus, the prosecutor's appeal is without merit.