The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

The main point of the grounds for appeal was that the victim made a consistent statement from the police to the court of original trial on the main part of the damage.

In particular, the statement was made consistently to the effect that “Titrts were her chested with clothes as she was her from the brush’s inside,” and the statement was made to the effect that “it was impossible to make a statement without experience.”

In addition, the court below held that the injured person could not consistently state the order of the damaged person's testimony, but the intent of the victim's testimony was almost common sense that the indecent act in this case was committed through almost a very short time in the signal atmosphere, and the above indecent act was committed in a very short time in the signal atmosphere, so that the victim's statement can be sufficiently understood, and that the victim was aware of the difference between the defendant, who was living on the face of the face, and who was living

It is wrong to recognize the credibility of the victim's statement on the ground that a person under the influence of alcohol did not act required to the normal person.

In light of the fact that the defendant drives the vehicle in the opposite direction to the victim's house and the opposite direction to the victim's house by leaving the victim's house, even though the victim had been aboard his house, the defendant enters the room building with the victim, the defendant falsely speaks that the victim's ship will be placed in the line with the victim's ship, although the victim does not have a face, the defendant makes a false statement that he will be placed in the line with the victim's ship, and after the commencement of the investigation, the defendant presents the amount of agreement first to the victim after having the victim's friendship with the victim's friendship.

In light of the above facts, the victim’s statement is sufficiently reliable, and according to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the facts charged in the instant case should be acknowledged, but the court below acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged in the instant case.

Judgment

The court below held that this case.