The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

It is somewhat unclear about some of the statements made by the investigative agency and the court of original instance by the victim of mistake.

Even if at the time, this is due to the fact that the victim was in a state of no depression due to the instant crime, and that the victim tried to accurately state his/her opinion only within the extent of his/her memory even after finding a stability, such circumstance should not be considered as a positive factor interfering with the recognition of the instant facts charged.

In light of the following circumstances revealed by the record, i.e., the fact that the defendant went to the family of the victim for the purpose of sexual intercourse, the defendant unilaterally went to the family of the victim and did not comply with the victim's request to leave several times, and the defendant went to the family immediately after the victim attempted to report the police, and the defendant went to the family of the victim immediately after the police, and the head of the family and the body of the victim was discovered, and the police officer in charge of the early investigation was testified that the victim did not make a false statement at the court below that the police officer did not have made a false statement, it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant used the force for the purpose of rape.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the charged facts of this case is erroneous in misconception of facts.

Judgment

The lower court rendered a not guilty verdict on the facts charged of this case on the grounds as stated in its reasoning, on the grounds that there was no proof of crime. The lower court found the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, namely, the Defendant stated that the Defendant would be under the victim’s house for the purpose of sexual intercourse with the victim (which is 30 pages of the evidence record). However, even if based on the victim’s statement at the lower court’s court hearing, the Defendant would have sexual intercourse with the victim who was seated on the floor.