The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the summary of the grounds for appeal, although the defendant was found to have used the victim's resident registration number unlawfully as shown in the facts charged, the court below found the defendant not guilty of the facts charged, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. In a judgment in a criminal trial, criminal facts must be found based on strict evidence of probative value, which makes a judge not to have any reasonable doubt. Thus, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof fails to fully reach the extent that the defendant’s assertion or defense is inconsistent or unreasonable, it should be determined in the interests of the defendant even if there is suspicion of guilt, such as where the defendant’s assertion or defense is inconsistent or unreasonable.

(1) The lower court determined that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance is clearly erroneous, or that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance is clearly unfair, in light of the content of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, and the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court is not clearly unreasonable, except in exceptional cases where it is determined that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance is considerably unfair, and the first instance court’s determination on the facts established by the first instance court without such exceptional circumstances should be respected, and the first instance court’s determination on the facts established by the first instance court without permission (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 201Do1487, Nov. 29, 2007; 2013Do13487, Apr. 28, 2011).