The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal (fact-finding) follows the following facts: (a) the victim talks with G; (b) G appears to have made a statement different from the victim in relation to the situation immediately before the Defendant committed the instant crime on January 1, 2012; (c) the victim’s statement at the investigation stage and the statement at the court for about four months differs from time to time; (d) it is difficult to expect that the victim made a consistent statement about the situation at the time of the instant crime; (e) the Defendant sent G letters and voice messages to the effect that the agreement was reached on April 7, 2012 following the first police investigation conducted for the instant case on April 7, 2012; (b) the Defendant refused the Defendant’s agreement; and (c) it is sufficient to view that the Defendant made a false statement on April 1, 2012 upon the Defendant’s request to provide credibility and credibility of the victim’s statement; and (e) it is reasonable to view that the Defendant made a false statement on April 1, 201.

In addition, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles regarding the defendant's acquittal, although it could sufficiently recognize the defendant's crime of this case based on other evidence submitted by the prosecutor.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is an infinite person who received a new picture and believed a non-exclusive religious belief in E located in Seongdong-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City.

around September 29, 2011, the mother of the victim F(F, 12 years of age) and the victim G showed that the Defendant was an infinite religious faith, and that he was finite from the Defendant, and that he was infinite to the Defendant.