The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The court below rejected the credibility of the victim's statement that conforms to the facts charged in this case and acquitted the defendant, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding facts or misunderstanding legal principles, which affected

2. Determination

A. The facts constituting the elements of the offense charged in a criminal trial should be based on the strict evidence with the probative value that leads to the prosecutor’s burden of proof, whether it is subjective or objective, and the recognition of the facts constituting the offense should be based on the strict evidence with the probative value that leads to the judge to have no reasonable doubt.

Therefore, in a case where the prosecutor’s evidence does not sufficiently reach the extent of inducing the above conviction, even if the defendant’s assertion or defense is contradictory or unreasonable, and there is doubt of guilt, it should be determined in the interest of the defendant (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Do14487, Apr. 28, 201). Moreover, in a case where direct evidence corresponding to the facts charged lies in the victim’s statement and the remainder of evidence is merely a specialized evidence based on the victim’s statement, etc., if the victim’s statement is insufficient to find guilty of the facts charged, the court below should comprehensively consider the reasonableness, consistency, and objective reasonableness of the statement made by the victim, as well as personal elements, such as the victim’s sex, etc. when determining whether there is such probative value (see Supreme Court Decision 2011Do16413, May 10, 2012; 201Do16413, May 10, 2012).

see.